[1995] UGHC 7

[1995] UGHC 7

The court found that although the original written agreement limited the use of the plaintiff's title deed as security to 30 days, the subsequent conduct of the parties, including the plaintiff's execution of a power of attorney and guarantee documents required by the bank, constituted an implied acceptance of new...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1995] UGHC 7
Parties
Plaintiff: Manasseh Kamugisha; Defendant: Uganda Pre-Fabricated Building Industry Ltd
Court
High Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Civil Suit No. 115 of 1994
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment
Outcome
suit dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Contract Modification, Security for Loans, Commission Entitlement, Breach of Contract, Estoppel, Mortgage Release
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Contract Modification Security for Loans Commission Entitlement Breach of Contract Estoppel Mortgage Release

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

Parties

Manasseh Kamugisha

Plaintiff

Uganda Pre-Fabricated Building Industry Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the agreement between the parties was limited to a period of 30 days.
  2. 2 Whether the terms of the contract were modified by subsequent conduct or agreement.
  3. 3 Whether there was a breach of contract by the defendant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the original written agreement limited the use of the plaintiff's title deed as security to 30 days, the subsequent conduct of the parties, including the plaintiff's execution of a power of attorney and guarantee documents required by the bank, constituted an implied acceptance of new terms. The plaintiff was aware that the bank would not release the security until the loan was fully repaid and accepted these conditions. Therefore, the contract was validly modified, and the plaintiff was estopped from insisting on the original 30-day term. As the defendant had not yet fully repaid the loan, there was no breach of contract, and the plaintiff was not entitled...

Court Disposition

suit dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The plaintiff's suit is dismissed with costs.
  • The plaintiff is not entitled to the return of his title deed until the loan is fully repaid.