Download

Uganda Judgment

Commercial Court of Uganda

Shine Pay (U) Ltd v Kiyonga Francis - (HCT-00-CC-CS 547 of 2004) [2006] UGCommC 8 (26 March 2006)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court found that the defendant was indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of US $2,639 under a loan agreement. Although the agreement provided for a penalty interest of 15% per month on defaulted instalments, the court held that this rate, amounting to 180% per annum, was manifestly excessive and unconscionable, especially given the friendly nature of the loan. The court exercised its discretion to award interest at a commercial rate of 25% per annum from the date of filing the suit until payment in full. The plaintiff was also awarded costs of the suit, with interest at the court rate from the date of taxation until payment in full. The decision was grounded in the principle that interest is compensatory for being kept out of money, and that excessive contractual rates can be moderated by the court.

Court disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff with modified interest and costs.

Orders

  • The defendant shall pay the plaintiff US $2,639.
  • Interest on US $2,639 at 25% per annum from 11/08/2004 until payment in full.
  • Plaintiff shall have costs of the suit, to attract interest at court rate from the date of taxation until payment in full.

02

Material facts

Parties

Shine Pay (U) Ltd

Plaintiff Counsel: David Innocent Nyote

Kiyonga Francis

Defendant

Amounts and remedies

  • Principal Sum Awarded: USD 2,639
  • Interest Rate Awarded (per Annum): USD 25

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Civil Suit / Ex Parte Judgment After Summary Procedure Judgment Set Aside and Defence Filed

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The plaintiff advanced US $2,933 to the defendant under a loan agreement, repayable in ten equal monthly instalments of US $294 each, with a penalty interest of 15% per month on any unpaid instalment. The defendant defaulted, paid only one instalment, and now owes US $2,639. The plaintiff claims interest at 15% per month from 30/7/2004 until payment in full, arguing this is contractually agreed and justified due to the defendant's default.
Respondent
The defendant did not appear or participate in the proceedings after filing a written statement of defence. No substantive argument was presented by the defendant.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    General legal principle; see also Harbutts Plasticide Ltd v Wyne Tank & Pump Co. Ltd [1970] 1 QB 447

    Interest can only be claimed if based on an agreement in the document sued upon or by statute; otherwise, it is a discretionary remedy.

  2. 02

    Juma v Habib [1975] EA 103 (T)

    Where a contractual interest rate is manifestly excessive and unconscionable, the court has discretion to award a lower rate.

  3. 03

    Sietco v Noble Builders (U) Ltd SCCA No. 31/95

    A party deprived of a liquidated sum through the wrongful act of another should be awarded interest from the date of filing the suit.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court found that the defendant was indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of US $2,639 under a loan agreement. Although the agreement provided for a penalty interest of 15% per month on defaulted instalments, the court held that this rate, amounting to 180% per annum, was manifestly excessive and unconscionable, especially given the friendly nature of the loan. The court exercised its discretion to award interest at a commercial rate of 25% per annum from the date of filing the suit until payment in full. The plaintiff was also awarded costs of the suit, with interest at the court rate from the date of taxation until payment in full. The decision was grounded in the principle that interest is compensatory for being kept out of money, and that excessive contractual rates can be moderated by the court.

Obiter and limits

  • There would be nothing 'friendly' about a loan attracting 180% per annum interest.
  • The absence of the defendant's participation has not made matters any easier for court.
  • Interest at 180% per annum is unrealistically high by Ugandan standards, especially for a friendly loan.

Court disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff with modified interest and costs.

  • The defendant shall pay the plaintiff US $2,639.
  • Interest on US $2,639 at 25% per annum from 11/08/2004 until payment in full.
  • Plaintiff shall have costs of the suit, to attract interest at court rate from the date of taxation until payment in full.

Source and reliance status

Commercial Court of Uganda

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Source document

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Commercial Court of Uganda

Judgment

[2006] UGCommC 8

{\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 \styrsid10363097 footer;}{\*\cs16 \additive \sbasedon10 \styrsid10363097 page number;}} {\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}{\*\rsidtbl

\rsid348228\rsid802970\rsid861732\rsid872560\rsid1136281\rsid1786980\rsid1911414\rsid2504610\rsid2970861\rsid3108559\rsid3496539\rsid4068773\rsid4478612\rsid5121755\rsid5645631\rsid5646035 \rsid6041232\rsid6454718\rsid7018431\rsid7032810\rsid7803031\rsid8084347\rsid8471884\rsid8539048\rsid8941359\rsid9070008\rsid9330907\rsid9914069\rsid10363097\rsid10384301\rsid10488469\rsid12986314\rsid13270043\rsid13374485\rsid13632604\rsid14103106 \rsid14158262\rsid14688970\rsid15665056\rsid15821225\rsid15953657\rsid15991476\rsid16128223\rsid16599140\rsid16712648}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 11.0.6568;}{\info{\title THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA}{\author ikobusinge}{\operator Harry Mak} {\creatim\yr2006\mo5\dy17\hr11\min2}{\revtim\yr2006\mo5\dy17\hr11\min2}{\printim\yr2006\mo3\dy27\hr12\min48}{\version2}{\edmins0}{\nofpages3}{\nofwords915}{\nofchars5222}{\*\company Courts of Judicature}{\nofcharsws6125}{\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\rsidroot8941359 \fet0 {\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql

\li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid14103106 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid14103106 \chftnsepc \par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid14103106 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid14103106 \chftnsepc \par }}\sectd \linex0\endnhere\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid8941359\sftnbj {\footer \pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\pvpara\phmrg\posxc\posy0\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid13632604 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\field{\*\fldinst {\cs16\insrsid15665056 PAGE }}{\fldrslt {\cs16\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid5121755 1}}}{\cs16\insrsid15665056 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid15665056 \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 {\fs28\insrsid1136281\charrsid8084347 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8941359 {\b\f36\fs28\insrsid8941359 THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA \par \par IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA \par (COMMERCIAL }{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12986314 COURT }{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid8941359 DIVISION) \par \par }{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid12986314 HCT-00-CC-CS-0}{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid8941359 547 OF 2004 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8941359 {\b\f36\fs28\insrsid8941359 \par SHINE PAY (U) LTD :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: PLAINTIFF \par \par }\pard \qc

\li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid802970 {\b\f36\fs28\insrsid8941359 VERSUS \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8941359 {\b\f36\fs28\insrsid8941359 \par KIYONGA FRANCIS ::::::::::::::::::::::: DEFENDANT \par \par \par BEFORE: }{\b\f36\fs28\ul\insrsid8941359\charrsid10363097 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE YOROKAMU BAMWINE}{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid8941359 \par \par }{\b\f36\fs28\ul\insrsid8941359\charrsid10363097 J U D G M E N T: \par }{\b\f36\fs28\insrsid8941359 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sl480\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid10384301 {\f36\insrsid3108559 The Plaintiff\rquote s claim against the Defendant is for US $2933, and interest at the rate of 15% per month on any }{ \f36\insrsid10488469 un}{\f36\insrsid3108559 paid instalment, from 30/7/2004 till payment in full.}{\f36\insrsid8539048 He filed the suit under Summary Procedure, 0.33 r 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules and obtained Judgment against the Defendant. Under Misc. Application No. 709/2004, the said Judgment was set aside and the Defendant filed a }{\f36\insrsid10488469 W}{ \f36\insrsid8539048 ritten }{\f36\insrsid10488469 S}{\f36\insrsid8539048 tatement of Defence. From then on, hearing stalled. Counsel for the Defendant}{\f36\insrsid13374485 failed to appear and

}{\f36\insrsid10488469 whenever}{\f36\insrsid13374485 he happened to appear }{\f36\insrsid10488469 he }{\f36\insrsid13374485 would advance an excuse for not proceeding. The Defendant never appeared in Court at all. On 16/3/2006, when neither the Defend ant nor his lawyer appeared in Court, I allowed the Plaintiff to proceed exparte.}{\f36\insrsid8941359 \par }{\f36\insrsid13374485 \par The Plaintiff led evidence of one witness, its Managing Director one Eyasu Sirak. He testified that on 21/4/2004, the Plaintiff advanced US $2,933 to the Defendant. He exh ibited a copy of the loan agreement to that effect. According to this agreement, the Defendant was supposed to pay back the said money in ten equal monthly instalments of US $294, effective July 30}{\f36\super\insrsid13374485\charrsid13374485 th}{ \f36\super\insrsid13374485 }{\f36\insrsid13374485 , 2004.}{\f36\insrsid4068773 Mr. Eyasu\rquote s evidence is that this was a friend ly loan where, however, the Defendant was obliged to pay interest of 15% per month on the unpaid instalments. While the claim is for US $2933, the witness admitted that during the pendency of the suit the Defendant was able to pay off one}{ \f36\insrsid2970861 instalment in the sum of US $294.}{\f36\insrsid13374485 \par }{\f36\insrsid2970861 \par From the evidence of this witness, the amount now due to the Plaintiff from the Defendant is US $2639.

}{\f36\insrsid9070008 I have no reason to believe that the Defendant is not indebted to the Plaintiff in that sum. It is decreed to it.}{ \f36\insrsid2970861 \par }{\f36\insrsid9070008 \par This leaves me with on}{\f36\insrsid10488469 e}{\f36\insrsid9070008 issue: that of interest. \par }{\f36\insrsid15991476 \par The Plaintiff\rquote s claim is for interest of 15% per month on any unpaid instalment from 30/7/2004 till payment in full. Mr. David Innocent Nyote has invited me to find that whereas the suit is premised on a loan agreement, wh ich advanced to the Defendant money on a friendly basis, the interest chargeable on the instalment upon which the Defendant}{\f36\insrsid13270043 defaulted i}{\f36\insrsid10488469 s}{\f36\insrsid13270043 okay. That it is perfectly legal in its spirit. That if the Defendant had honoured the agreement, he would not pay any interest. But that he defaulted and continues to do so, and the interest}{\f36\insrsid2504610 of 15% per month is legally levied against him.}{\f36\insrsid15991476 \par }{\f36\insrsid2504610 \par I have very carefully addressed my mind to counsel\rquote s argument. The absence of the Defendant\rquote s participation has of course not made matters any easier for Court. \par \par Be that as it may, it is the stand of this Court that interest, if it is not part of the contract terms, becomes a discretionary remedy. The general

rule is that interest can only be claimed if the claim is based on an agre ement for it in the document sued upon or by statute. In the instant case, the interest claimed by the Plaintiff against the Defendant is not based on an agreement. The agreement only provided for payment of }{\f36\insrsid10488469 a penalty at the rate of }{\f36\insrsid2504610 15% per month in the event of a default by the Defendant on the principal sum. By simple arithmetic, 15% per annum translates into 18}{\f36\insrsid10488469 0}{\f36\insrsid2504610 % per annum which by Ugandan Standards is unrealistically high, especially in a situation where the parties agree that it was just a friendly loan.}{\f36\insrsid10488469 There would be nothing \lquote friendly\rquote about it.}{\f36\insrsid2504610

\par }{\f36\insrsid16712648 \par In my view, while this penalty may have been intended to discourage wilful defaults, interest at 180%}{\f36\insrsid5646035 per annum would be excessive. This Court has a discretion to award interest at less than the contract ual rate when that rate is manifestly excessive and unconscionable. See: }{\f36\ul\insrsid5646035 Juma \endash Vs- Habib [1975] EA 103 (T).}{\f36\insrsid16712648 \par }{\f36\insrsid5646035 \par The Plaintiff has in the plaint prayed for interest of 15% p.m from the date of default till payment in full. The principle of interest as a discretionary}{\f36\insrsid8471884 remedy was laid down by Lord Denning in }{\f36\ul\insrsid8471884 Harbutts Plasticide }{\f36\ul\insrsid14158262 L}{\f36\ul\insrsid8471884 td \endash Vs- Wyne Tank & Pump Co. Ltd [1970] 1 QB 447.}{\f36\insrsid8471884 He observed:}{\f36\insrsid5646035 \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\sl480\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid1911414 {\i\f36\insrsid8471884\charrsid1911414 \'93 An award of interest is discretionary. It seems to me that the basis of an award of interest is that the Defendant has kept the Plaintiff out of his money; and the Defendant has had the use of it himself. So he}{\i\f36\insrsid3496539\charrsid1911414 ought to compensate the Plaintiff accordingly.\'94}{\i\f36\insrsid8471884\charrsid1911414 \par }\pard \qj

\li0\ri0\sl480\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid10384301 {\f36\insrsid3496539 \par I agree with the above principle.}{\f36\insrsid7032810 In the instant case, the Plaintiff advanced a friendly loan to the Defendant. The Defendant was given a grace period of three months and when }{\f36\insrsid14158262 the initial }{ \f36\insrsid7032810 payment }{\f36\insrsid14158262 fell }{\f36\insrsid7032810 due, the Defendant }{\f36\insrsid14158262 defaulted}{\f36\insrsid7032810 . To date, a sum of US $2639, is still due and owing. On seeing that the}{\f36\insrsid15821225 payments were not forthcoming, the Plaintiff filed this suit under Summary Procedure. The Defendant then moved in to defend the suit but thereafter disappeared.}{\f36\insrsid3496539 \par }{\f36\insrsid5645631 \par The principle that emerges from the authorities, including }{\f36\ul\insrsid5645631 Sietco \endash Vs- Noble Builders (U) Ltd SCCA No. 31/95}{\f36\insrsid5645631 is that where a person}{\f36\insrsid7018431 is entitled to a liquida ted amount or specific goods and has been deprived of them through the wrongful act of another person, he should be awarded interest from the date of filing the suit. Where, however, damages have to be assessed by the Court, the right to these damages do es not arise until they are assessed. In such event, interest is only given from the date of Judgment. In the instant suit, }{\f36\insrsid14158262 there are no }{\f36\insrsid7018431 damages being claimed.}{\f36\insrsid348228 }{\f36\insrsid5645631

\par }{\f36\insrsid9914069 \par From the evidence on record, Court is satisfied that the Defendant has kept the Plaintiff out of its money. The Defendant has had use of it to warrant an order of compensation on account of that to the Plaintiff. \par }{\f36\insrsid8084347 \par In these circumstances, I award interest on the principal sum of US $2639 at the commercial rate of 25% per annum from the date of fi ling the suit (11/08/2004) till payment in full. The Plaintiff shall also have the costs of this suit, to attract interest at Court rate from the date of taxation till payment in full. \par \par Ordered accordingly. \par \par }{\b\f36\insrsid8084347\charrsid861732 Yorokamu Bamwine \par J U D G E \par 27/03/2006 \par }{\f36\insrsid8084347 \par }{\b\f36\insrsid8084347\charrsid861732 \par }}

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Juma v Habib [1975] EA 103 (T)

Case cited

Harbutts Plasticide Ltd v Wyne Tank & Pump Co. Ltd [1970] 1 QB 447

Case cited

Sietco v Noble Builders (U) Ltd SCCA No. 31/95

Case cited

Civil Procedure Rules, Order 33 rule 2

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this JurisAssist collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.