Uganda Case Law

Virani v Singh and Another

Virani v Singh and Another (Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1945) [1946] EACA 2 (1 January 1946)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1945

Judge

Gray CJ, Sheridan CJ, Whitley CJ

The Court of Appeal held that the sale agreement was not void for uncertainty, as its terms regarding vacant possession and compensation were clear and enforceable. The clause requiring payment of Sh. 70 per room per month for rooms not delivered as vacant did not create a tenancy but constituted liquidated damages for breach of the vendor's obligation to deliver vacant possession. The use of the word 'rent' was not determinative; the intention of the parties, as gathered from the agreement as a whole, was to provide compensation, not to establish a landlord-tenant relationship. The agreement…

Source excerpt

• Vendor Purchaser Agreements
• Liquidated Damages
• Vacant Possession
• Contract Uncertainty
• Rent Restriction Legislation

Melson v Holm (C.C. No. 165/1935)

Melson v Holm (C.C. No. 165/1935) [1937] EACA 208 (1 January 1937)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

C.C. No. 165/1935

Judge

Webb, J

The court held that a sole proprietor could sue for the firm’s debt, rejected an unpleaded cross-claim, and found a payment-deferral term void for uncertainty.

• Sole Proprietorship
• Debt Recovery
• Contract Uncertainty
• Pleading And Practice
• Sole-proprietorship
• Debt-recovery