[2005] UGCommC 73

[2005] UGCommC 73

The court found that the applicant failed to disclose any triable issue of fact or law. The alleged breach for non-execution of external works was unfounded, as those works had been excluded from the contract by the applicant's own written variation. The applicant's claim of technical default was unsupported by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] UGCommC 73
Parties
Applicant: Wamiko Construction Co. (U) Ltd; Respondent: Trans Action International Ltd
Court
Commercial Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
HCT-00-CC-MA 711 of 2005
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appear and Defend
Outcome
application dismissed; judgment entered for respondent
Legal Topics
Subcontractor Liability, Breach of Contract, Summary Judgment, Triable Issue Standard
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Subcontractor Liability Breach of Contract Summary Judgment Triable Issue Standard

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wamiko Construction Co. (U) Ltd

Applicant

Trans Action International Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appear and Defend

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has disclosed a triable issue of fact or law to justify leave to appear and defend the suit.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent is entitled to summary judgment for the sum claimed in the plaint.
  3. 3 Whether exclusion of external works from the contract absolved the respondent from liability for non-completion.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to disclose any triable issue of fact or law. The alleged breach for non-execution of external works was unfounded, as those works had been excluded from the contract by the applicant's own written variation. The applicant's claim of technical default was unsupported by particulars. The final account and correspondence from the applicant confirmed the debt owed to the respondent, and no set-off or counterclaim was pleaded. The supplementary affidavit's reference to liquidated damages from the owner was unconnected to the respondent and did not constitute a defence. Accordingly, the application for leave to appear and defend was dismissed, and...

Court Disposition

application dismissed; judgment entered for respondent

Orders

  • Application for leave to appear and defend is dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment is entered for the respondent in the sum of US$95,021.22 with costs of the suit.