Court dismisses Gama Distillers Limited's claim over sh115 million unpaid debt

_____________________

The High Court has dismissed a sh115 million case filed by Gama Distillers Limited, a company involved in the supply of liquor.

The proprietor of Gama Distillers had sued Ezra Bikanza, alleging that the two entered into a contract for the supply and distribution of liquor.

According to the court document, the company engaged in the distillation and supply of liquor, sued over an alleged unpaid balance of sh115.4 million arising from a 2019 alcohol supply and distribution agreement involving bottled and sachet products.

Gama Distillers Limited contended that despite delivering the products and issuing several reminders and demand notices, the outstanding balance remained unpaid.  

The court also dismissed the other claims lodged by the company on the ground that there was no evidence to prove them.

In his defence, Bikanza raised preliminary objections, describing the suit as frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of the court process. He denied ever entering into any contract with the plaintiff for the supply of liquor or any other goods and rejected claims that he owed the company any money. The defendant further denied admitting to any breach of contract and challenged the plaintiff to strictly prove all allegations regarding the alleged supply of goods and non-payment. He maintained that there was no legal or commercial relationship between the parties to justify the claim as had been alleged

While delivering the judgment on May 20, 2026, Justice Vincent Wagona ruled that Gama Distillers Limited had failed to prove that Ezra Bikanza breached any contract.

Justice Wagona further held that the claims for general damages and interest arising from the alleged breach of contract could not stand and therefore could not be awarded.

“Similarly, claims for general damages for breach of contract cannot be sustained. General damages in contractual matters are awarded to compensate for loss from a proven breach. where no breach has been established, such damages cannot arise,” Justice Wagona said.

The court further noted that the inconsistencies in the case of Gama Distillers Limited regarding the dates of the alleged contract, the figures claimed, and the basis of the purported indebtedness made it impossible for the court to ascertain with precision the obligation Bikanza was said to have breached. The court noted that a claim for breach of contract must be anchored on clear, definite, and ascertainable terms and cannot be based on conjecture or internally inconsistent evidence.