[2006] UGCommC 28

[2006] UGCommC 28

The court found that the defendant, as a bailiff, received Shs.80,548,055 from Uganda Revenue Authority for the benefit of the plaintiff but only remitted Shs.33,000,000. The defendant failed to provide evidence of any further payments or an agreement with the plaintiff to accept a lesser sum. The court held that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] UGCommC 28
Parties
Plaintiff: Global Forwarders & Clearing Ltd; Defendant: Henry Mugenyi t/a Kifaru High Court Bailiffs & Auctioneers
Court
Commercial Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
HCT-00-CC-CS 188 of 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ex Parte Judgment After Reinstatement
Outcome
judgment for the plaintiff
Legal Topics
Execution of Judgments, Bailiff Liability, Money Had and Received, Unjust Enrichment
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Execution of Judgments Bailiff Liability Money Had and Received Unjust Enrichment

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Global Forwarders & Clearing Ltd

Plaintiff

Henry Mugenyi t/a Kifaru High Court Bailiffs & Auctioneers

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ex Parte Judgment After Reinstatement

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff Shs.18,300,922 as claimed.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant accounted for all monies received from Uganda Revenue Authority on behalf of the plaintiff.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to general damages and interest.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant, as a bailiff, received Shs.80,548,055 from Uganda Revenue Authority for the benefit of the plaintiff but only remitted Shs.33,000,000. The defendant failed to provide evidence of any further payments or an agreement with the plaintiff to accept a lesser sum. The court held that the burden of proof was on the defendant to show that the outstanding amount had been paid or that there was an agreement to accept less, which he failed to do. The court applied the doctrine of money had and received and unjust enrichment, concluding that the defendant was liable to pay the outstanding sum of Shs.18,300,922 to the plaintiff. The claim for general damages was...

Court Disposition

judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

  • The defendant shall pay the plaintiff Shs.18,300,922.
  • Interest on the decretal amount at 23% per annum from the date of judgment until payment in full.