Case Digest · For Law Reporting

Salini Construttori SpA v. The Attorney General and Uganda National Roads Authority

High Court of Uganda (Commercial Division) · Civil Suit No. 0979 of 2016 · Mubiru, J.

Case: Salini Construttori SpA v. Attorney General and Uganda National Roads Authority
Suit: Civil Suit No. 0979 of 2016
Court: High Court of Uganda at Kampala, Commercial Division
Coram: Stephen Mubiru, J.
Heard: 6 July 2022
Delivered: 30 September 2026 (electronically)
Status: Reportable
Counsel: Plaintiff: M/s BKA Advocates. 1st defendant: Attorney General's Chambers. 2nd defendant: In-house Counsel.
Result: Suit dismissed with costs to the 1st defendant.

In Brief

The plaintiff's claim under a road construction contract was dismissed: a Deed of Settlement and Release barred every substantive claim, leaving only a nil-balance final account. No written submissions were filed by either side; the court decided on the record (para 9).

Catchwords

CIVIL PROCEDURE — Written submissions — Failure to file — Court deciding on pleadings and evidence on record without oral or written closing submissions — Power of court to proceed under Order 18 r 2 CPR — Judgment on the record.

CONTRACT — Accord and satisfaction — Settlement agreement — Execution of Deed of Settlement and Release — Effect on prior claims under main contract — Release of all past, present and future claims — Whether claim for interest and unpaid certificates survives settlement.

CONTRACT — Construction contract — FIDIC conditions — Final account — Determination of final payment certificate — Nil-balance final account — Onus on contractor to prove unpaid work.

EVIDENCE — Onus of proof — Breach of contract — Failure by plaintiff to adduce evidence in support of pleaded quantum — Unsubstantiated claims in witness statement unsupported by documentary evidence.

Cases Cited

• British Russian Gazette & Trade Outlook Ltd v Associated Newspapers Ltd [1933] 1 KB 616
• Fakrudin v Kampala District Land Board HCCS No 570 of 2015
• National Pharmacy Co v St Bartholomew's Hospital [1992] 1 WLR 1282

Legislation Cited

• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1, Order 18 r 2, Order 6 r 2, Order 7 r 14
• Contracts Act 2010, s 62

Summary of Facts

The plaintiff, Salini Construttori SpA, entered into a road construction contract with the 2nd defendant (UNRA), representing the 1st defendant (Attorney General), for the upgrading of a major trunk road. Disputes arose during performance regarding variations, delays, and interest on delayed payments. The parties subsequently executed a Deed of Settlement and Release intending to settle all outstanding financial disputes up to the date of execution.

Notwithstanding the settlement deed, the plaintiff instituted this suit claiming UGX 4.2 billion in unpaid valuation certificates, interest on delayed payments, and damages for breach of contract. The 1st defendant contended that the Deed of Settlement fully discharged all claims under the contract and that the final account prepared pursuant to the settlement showed a nil balance due to the plaintiff.

Issues for Determination

1. Whether the court could proceed to deliver judgment on the record where neither party filed written submissions within the timeline directed by court.
2. Whether the Deed of Settlement and Release executed by the parties operated as a complete bar to the plaintiff's claims under the construction contract.
3. Whether the plaintiff proved any sum due under the final account or by way of interest on delayed payments.

Held (Dismissing the suit with costs to the 1st Defendant)

1. Failure to file written submissions does not prevent judgment on the record:
Closing submissions are an aid to the court, not a mandatory prerequisite for judgment. Where parties fail to file written submissions within the stipulated time despite clear directions, the court is entitled under Order 18 r 2 CPR to proceed to evaluate the pleadings and evidence on record and render its judgment (para 9).

2. Deed of Settlement constituted accord and satisfaction:
The Deed of Settlement and Release executed by the parties contained clear, unambiguous language releasing both defendants from "all actions, claims, demands, and liabilities of any nature whatsoever" arising out of or in connection with the contract prior to the settlement date. This constituted classic accord and satisfaction, discharging the underlying contract claims (paras 18–22).

3. Failure of proof on quantum and final account:
The onus rested on the plaintiff to prove that any entitlement survived the settlement deed or arose after its execution. The plaintiff failed to produce certified final account statements or primary accounting documentation supporting the claimed UGX 4.2 billion. Unsubstantiated assertions in witness statements without supporting documentary evidence are insufficient to establish a claim under a complex engineering contract (paras 28–31).

PREPARED BY: Magna Advocates Legal Team