Impact Solution Ltd v Alarm Group Ltd and Anor - (HCT-00-CC-CS 408 of 2002) [2006] UGCommC 10 (2 April 2006)

{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f36\fswiss\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 020b0604030504040204}Tahoma;} {\f251\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}{\f252\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f254\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f255\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;} {\f256\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);}{\f257\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f258\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f259\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);} {\f611\fswiss\fcharset238\fprq2 Tahoma CE;}{\f612\fswiss\fcharset204\fprq2 Tahoma Cyr;}{\f614\fswiss\fcharset161\fprq2 Tahoma Greek;}{\f615\fswiss\fcharset162\fprq2 Tahoma Tur;}{\f616\fswiss\fcharset177\fprq2 Tahoma (Hebrew);} {\f617\fswiss\fcharset178\fprq2 Tahoma (Arabic);}{\f618\fswiss\fcharset186\fprq2 Tahoma Baltic;}{\f619\fswiss\fcharset163\fprq2 Tahoma (Vietnamese);}{\f620\fswiss\fcharset222\fprq2 Tahoma (Thai);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255; \red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0; \red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar \tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext15 \styrsid12137435 footer;}{\*\cs16 \additive \sbasedon10 \styrsid12137435 page number;}} {\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid663104\rsid872560\rsid935331\rsid1129697\rsid1136281\rsid1253789\rsid1994976\rsid2181377\rsid2514141\rsid2689720\rsid3608750\rsid3897559\rsid4281444\rsid4468354\rsid4787242\rsid5201717 \rsid5587098\rsid5985857\rsid6041232\rsid6567896\rsid6882017\rsid7427319\rsid7565343\rsid7803031\rsid7878908\rsid8281265\rsid8811135\rsid10697887\rsid11363718\rsid11478326\rsid11546468\rsid12137435\rsid12464648\rsid12994163\rsid13177638\rsid13916589 \rsid14183893\rsid14632327\rsid15217467\rsid15284470\rsid15695172\rsid16087932\rsid16592692}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 11.0.6568;}{\info{\title THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA}{\author ikobusinge}{\operator Harry Mak}{\creatim\yr2006\mo5\dy17\hr11\min1} {\revtim\yr2006\mo5\dy17\hr11\min1}{\version2}{\edmins0}{\nofpages3}{\nofwords1346}{\nofchars7675}{\*\company Courts of Judicature}{\nofcharsws9003}{\vern24579}}\margl1728\margr1152 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\formshade\horzdoc\dgmargin\dghspace180\dgvspace180\dghorigin1728\dgvorigin1440\dghshow1\dgvshow1 \jexpand\viewkind1\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\splytwnine\ftnlytwnine\htmautsp\nolnhtadjtbl\useltbaln\alntblind\lytcalctblwd\lyttblrtgr\lnbrkrule\nobrkwrptbl\snaptogridincell\allowfieldendsel\wrppunct\asianbrkrule\nojkernpunct\rsidroot12994163 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid13177638 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid13177638 \chftnsepc \par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid13177638 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid13177638 \chftnsepc \par }}\sectd \psz1\linex0\endnhere\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid12994163\sftnbj {\footer \pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\pvpara\phmrg\posxc\posy0\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14632327 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\field{\*\fldinst {\cs16\insrsid12464648 PAGE }}{\fldrslt {\cs16\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid4468354 1}}}{\cs16\insrsid12464648 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid12464648 \par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}} {\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8 \pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\f36\fs28\insrsid1136281\charrsid935331 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12994163 {\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12994163 THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA \par \par IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA \par (COMMERCIAL }{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid16087932 COURT }{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12994163 DIVISION) \par \par }{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid16087932 HCT-00-CC-CS-0}{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12994163 408 OF 2002 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12994163 {\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12994163 \par IMPACT SOLUTION LTD ::::::::::::::::::::::::: PLAINTIFF \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid935331 {\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12994163 VERSUS \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12994163 {\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12994163 \par }{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid7878908 1. }{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12994163 ALARM GROUP LTD}{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid7878908 ]}{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12994163 }{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid7878908 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid7878908 {\b\f36\fs28\insrsid7878908 2. J. TUMWIJUKYE ]}{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid7878908\charrsid7878908 }{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid7878908 ::::::::::::::::::::::: DEFENDANTS \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12994163 {\b\f36\fs28\insrsid7878908 }{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12994163 \par \par BEFORE: }{\b\f36\fs28\ul\insrsid12994163\charrsid11363718 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE YOROKAMU BAMWINE}{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12994163 \par \par }{\b\f36\fs28\ul\insrsid12994163\charrsid11363718 J U D G M E N T}{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12994163 : \par \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sl480\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12994163 {\f36\insrsid12994163 The Plaintiff\rquote s claim against the Defendants jointly and severally is for r ecovery of Ug. Shs.9,000,000- and costs of the suit.}{\f36\insrsid15284470 The claim is based on an advertisement contract by which the Defendants contracted the Plaintiff to appear on the Plaintiff\rquote s celebrity shopper\rquote s year planner. The year planner was produced but the sum}{\f36\insrsid5201717 was allegedly not paid by the Defendants. Hence the suit.}{\f36\insrsid12994163 \par }{\f36\insrsid5201717 \par The defence case is that there was no contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendants. That the instructions were from a junior officer who did not have authority. In the alternative, the Defendant argues that if the }{\f36\insrsid13916589 order was made, the Defendants did not approve the artwork and design before publication. Hence the defence prayer that the suit be dismissed with costs.}{\f36\insrsid5201717 \par }{\f36\insrsid13916589 I have been asked to decide: \par 1.\tab Whether the 2}{\f36\super\insrsid13916589\charrsid13916589 nd}{\f36\insrsid13916589 Defendant\rquote s instructions bound the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid13916589\charrsid13916589 st}{\f36\insrsid13916589 Defendant. \par 2.\tab Whether the 2}{\f36\super\insrsid13916589\charrsid13916589 nd}{\f36\insrsid13916589 Defendant can be held personally liable on the order. \par 3.\tab Whether the Defendants had to approve the art work and design before \tab publication. \par 4.\tab If so, whether the advert published by the Plaintiff was unilateral and \tab substandard. \par 5.\tab Remedies. \par \par From the records, the Defendants did participate in the proceedings up to the close of the Plaintiff\rquote s case. They did so through their counsel. Court warned the defence that if it did not produce its witnesses on the due date , hearing stood to be closed under 0.15 r 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Come that date the defence offered no defence and tru}{\f36\insrsid10697887 e to its prophecy the Court proceeded to determine the case on its merits in accordance with that law. }{\f36\insrsid2514141 }{\f36\insrsid7878908 \par \par }{\f36\insrsid2514141 As to whether the 2}{\f36\super\insrsid2514141\charrsid2514141 nd}{\f36\insrsid2514141 Defendant\rquote s instructions bound the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid2514141\charrsid2514141 st}{\f36\insrsid2514141 Defendant, the evidence of PW1, Mirembe Julius, is that the 2}{\f36\super\insrsid2514141\charrsid2514141 nd}{\f36\insrsid2514141 Defendant was an employee of the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid2514141\charrsid2514141 st}{\f36\insrsid2514141 Defendant. There is no evidence to the contrary. From the evidence of PW1, before the agreement was signed, he had discussions with the Managing Director of the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid2514141\charrsid2514141 st}{\f36\insrsid2514141 Defendant. That having agreed in principle to enter into the arrangement, the said Managing Director referred the matter to one of his staff, the 2}{\f36\super\insrsid2514141\charrsid2514141 nd}{\f36\insrsid2514141 Defendant. It is the evidence of this witness that on the strength of that interaction,}{\f36\insrsid1129697 an order was placed to that effect. This evidence has not been controverted by the defence.}{\f36\insrsid15217467 This is a civil suit. }{ \f36\insrsid16592692 The standard of proof is on a balance of probabilities. A fact is said to be proved when the Court is satisfied as to its truth. The evidence by which that result is achieved is called the proof. The general rule is that the burden of proof lies on the party who asserts the affirmative of the issue or question in dispute. When that party adduces evide n ce sufficient to raise a presumption that what he asserts is true, he is said to shift the burden of proof: that is, his allegation is presumed to be true, unless his opponent adduces evidence to rebut the presumption. These principles form the cornersto ne on which our adversarial system of adjucation rests.}{\f36\insrsid13916589 \par }{\f36\insrsid1253789 \par In the instant case, it is noteworthy that the reason advanced by the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid1253789\charrsid1253789 st}{\f36\insrsid1253789 Defendant for the non-payment, in as far as it can be deciphered from its written statement of Defence is that the 2}{\f36\super\insrsid1253789\charrsid1253789 nd}{\f36\insrsid1253789 Defenda nt was not authorized to conclude the contract. The Managing Director has not appeared as a witness to challenge the evidence of PW1 Mirembe that he had discussions with him and that thereafter he, the Managing Director, referred him to his subordinate, 2}{\f36\super\insrsid1253789\charrsid1253789 nd}{\f36\insrsid1253789 Defendant. In these circumstances, Court has accepted PW1\rquote s evidence as truthful. It is evidence that shows that 2}{\f36\super\insrsid1253789\charrsid1253789 nd}{ \f36\insrsid1253789 Defendant ha}{\f36\insrsid3608750 d}{\f36\insrsid1253789 power to }{\f36\insrsid3608750 conclude the deal}{\f36\insrsid1253789 on behalf of his boss, and therefore the organization both of them worked for. In such a sit uation, the contract becomes that of the employer, known in the field of agency as the principal. This does not render the agent personally liable because it was not personally his contract. The principle of law is that he who does something through ano ther does it himself. \par }{\f36\insrsid15695172 \par }{\f36\insrsid6567896 I have been invited to find that the transaction in issue was authorized by the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid6567896\charrsid6567896 st}{\f36\insrsid6567896 Defendant}{\f36\insrsid15695172 \rquote }{\f36\insrsid6567896 s top executive and therefore is binding on it. That whether the 2}{\f36\super\insrsid6567896\charrsid6567896 nd}{\f36\insrsid6567896 Defendant had authority to sign advertisement orders or not was an int ernal matter which was not brought to the Plaintiff\rquote s attention. Going by the unchallenged evidence of PW1 on the matter, Court is persuaded by that argument.}{\f36\insrsid7565343 It is evidence that proves that the 2}{ \f36\super\insrsid7565343\charrsid7565343 nd}{\f36\insrsid7565343 Defendant\rquote s instructions bound the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid7565343\charrsid7565343 st}{\f36\insrsid7565343 Defendant and that the 2}{\f36\super\insrsid7565343\charrsid7565343 nd}{ \f36\insrsid7565343 Defendant is not personally liable on the order.}{\f36\insrsid6567896 \par }{\f36\insrsid7565343 \par Accordingly, issue No. 1 is answered in the affirmative; and issue No. 2 in the negative. \par \par As to whether the Defendants had to approve the art work and design before publication, the evidence of Mirembe Julius is that the same were approved by the Public Relations Department of the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid7565343\charrsid7565343 st}{ \f36\insrsid7565343 Defendant. This evidence has not been challenged. \par \par I have also considered the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid7565343\charrsid7565343 st}{\f36\insrsid7565343 Defendant\rquote s averment in its Written Statement of Defence that the Defendants didn\rquote t approve the art work and design before publication and that what the Plaintiff unilaterally published was erroneous and sub-standard. Once again, the evidence of Mirembe Julius that the Public Relations Department of the 1}{ \f36\super\insrsid7565343\charrsid7565343 st}{\f36\insrsid7565343 Defendant designed all that was published has not been challenged. This Court accepts his evidence that all the Plaintiff did was to publish. Designing was done by officials of the 1}{ \f36\super\insrsid7565343\charrsid7565343 st}{\f36\insrsid7565343 Defendant. 1}{\f36\super\insrsid7565343\charrsid7565343 st}{\f36\insrsid7565343 Defendant\rquote s claim that the art work was substandard has not been substantiated. In any}{ \f36\insrsid663104 case, even if this were so, the Defendants did not have to wait until the suit was filed to raise the complaint. As soon as the demand for payment was made to the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid663104\charrsid663104 st}{\f36\insrsid663104 Defendant, its reaction would have been that the same was substandard and therefore unacceptable. I have not seen any communication from the Defendants, other than the averment in the WSD, that the Plaintiff\rquote s art work was substandard. Court is of the view that this was an afterthought.}{\f36\insrsid7565343 \par }{\f36\insrsid663104 \par Turning now to the issue of damages, the Plai ntiff has shown by documentary evidence and oral testimony of PW1 that it forwarded a bill of Shs.9,000,000- to the Defendants. This amount has of course been disputed by the Defendants much as they did not lead evidence to justify the dispute. \par }{\f36\insrsid7427319 \par I have considered the fact that the Defendants designed the art work themselves and gave it to the Plaintiffs to put on their chart. From the evidence, especially P. Exh. 2, the Defendant\rquote s art piece occupied most space on the chart. Court has, however, not received any indication as to how much the other advertisers paid for comparable space. I have considered PW1\rquote s evidence}{\f36\insrsid3897559 that the Plaintiff offered a discount to the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid3897559\charrsid3897559 st}{\f36\insrsid3897559 Defendant and reduced the amount to Shs.5,500,000- which the Defendants still refused to pay. }{\f36\insrsid4281444 The Plaintiff may have reverted to its earlier bill of Shs.9,000,000- upon the Defendants failing to reciprocate the kind gesture. However, it shows also that the Plaintiffs }{\f36\insrsid15695172 may have}{\f36\insrsid4281444 invoiced the Defendants. Doing the best I can in the circumstances of this case and taking into account the Defendants failure to lead evidence in the matter, }{\f36\insrsid15695172 I }{\f36\insrsid4281444 consider a sum of Shs.4,500,000- adequate}{ \f36\insrsid8281265 as compensation for the services rendered by the Plaintiff to the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid8281265\charrsid8281265 st}{\f36\insrsid8281265 Defendant at the 2}{\f36\super\insrsid8281265\charrsid8281265 nd}{\f36\insrsid8281265 Defendant \rquote s request. The sum of Shs.4,500,000- is accordingly decreed to the Plaintiff.}{\f36\insrsid7427319 \par }{\f36\insrsid2689720 \par As regards the claim for interest, I notice that the original}{\f36\insrsid2181377 plaint did not have a claim for interest. The amendment seeks interest at the rate of 28% p.a from June 2002 till payment in full. Interest, unless it is part of the contract terms, is a discretionary remedy. The general rule is that interest can only be claimed if the claim is based on an agreement for it in the document sued upon or by statute.}{\f36\insrsid2689720 \par }{\f36\insrsid6882017 \par In the instant case, the interest claimed by the Plaintiff is not based on any agreement. It is only based on the fact that the 1}{\f36\super\insrsid6882017\charrsid6882017 st}{\f36\insrsid6882017 Defendant has kept the Plaintiff out of its money and that the said Defendant has been using it. In these circumstances, interest shall be awarded to the Pla intiff at a commercial rate of 25% per annum. The suit was filed in July 2002. The plaint was amended almost 2 years later. Though dated 29/4/2004, it appears not to have been filed till 29/4/2005, the date appearing on the Court stamp. I shall go by that date and order that interest be calculated from the date the claim for it was made, that is, 29/4/2005, till payment in full. \par }{\f36\insrsid11546468 \par The Plaintiff shall also have the costs of the suit, to attract interest at Court rate from the date of taxation till payment in full. \par }{\f36\fs16\insrsid11546468\charrsid12464648 \par }{\f36\insrsid11546468 I order so. \par }{\f36\fs16\insrsid11546468\charrsid12464648 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12464648 {\b\f36\insrsid11546468\charrsid11546468 Yorokamu Bamwine \par J U D G E \par 3/4/2006 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sl480\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12994163 {\f36\fs16\insrsid11546468\charrsid12464648 \par }}