[2004] UGCommC 16

[2004] UGCommC 16

The Plaintiff was contracted to drill boreholes for the Defendant, with the contract price inclusive of VAT. The Defendant paid all amounts except the VAT component, which the Plaintiff was compelled to pay to URA. The VAT Act requires the supplier to pay VAT, but the contract stipulated that the price included VAT,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2004] UGCommC 16
Parties
Plaintiff: Draco (U) Ltd; Defendant: Kamuli District Local Council
Court
Commercial Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Civil Suit No. 250 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment
Outcome
judgment_for_plaintiff
Legal Topics
Vat Refund, Contractual Liability, Public Procurement, Interest Award
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Tax Law Vat Refund Contractual Liability Public Procurement Interest Award

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Draco (U) Ltd

Plaintiff

Kamuli District Local Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to a refund of the VAT it paid to URA.
  2. 2 What other remedies, if any, are available to the Plaintiff.

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff was contracted to drill boreholes for the Defendant, with the contract price inclusive of VAT. The Defendant paid all amounts except the VAT component, which the Plaintiff was compelled to pay to URA. The VAT Act requires the supplier to pay VAT, but the contract stipulated that the price included VAT, making the Defendant liable for reimbursement. The Defendant's reliance on a Ministry of Finance directive was irrelevant, as MOF was not a party to the contract and the directive did not bind the Plaintiff. The Defendant did not plead frustration and failed to adduce admissible evidence supporting its position. The Plaintiff is entitled to a refund of the VAT paid, interest...

Court Disposition

judgment_for_plaintiff

Orders

  • Defendant to pay Plaintiff Shs.14,679,971 as VAT refund.
  • Defendant to pay interest at 20% per annum from 9/7/2002 until payment in full.