Court orders Microcare to pay Kadic sh80m

Sep 10, 2012

Court has ordered a health insurance company, Microcare Health Limited, to pay over sh80m to Kadic Hospital Limited for breach of contract.

By Hillary Nsambu        
                
THE Commercial Court has ordered a health insurance company, Microcare Health Limited, to pay over sh80m to Kadic Hospital Limited for breach of contract.

However, Justice Geoffrey Kiryabwire, the head of the court, rejected a counter claim in which Microcare Health Ltd had sought to recover sh30m as an overpayment against the hospital.

The judge strongly agreed with John Mary Kiwuuwa, the lawyer representing Kadic Hospital that the claim that Microcare Health Ltd made a year after the hospital had presented its demands for payment was an afterthought that cannot be accepted by the court.

“I am satisfied with the evidence by the auditor, Masereka Nsibasi, of Toptech Consults that proved that a total of sh78, 197,715 as the outstanding amounts due to the plaintiff against the defendant and I order that they be paid with interest at 21% pa from the date of filing until payment in full,” the judge ordered.

He also ordered that given the circumstances in which both sides managed their agreement, he would also grant nominal general damages of sh2m with 8% pa against Microcare Health Ltd from the date of judgment till payment in full.

Kiwuuwa had told the court that following a signed agreement, Kadic Hospital provided services to Mircocare Health's clients between 2005 and 2007 to the tune of over sh87m as unpaid medical bills; but the defendant defaulted all the time.

The plaintiff terminated the contract after the defendant issued two bouncing cheques of over sh17m, hence the law suit for breach of contract.

However, Microcare Health Ltd, represented by Allan Nshimye, had vehemently denied the allegations, claiming overpayment of sh30m that it sought to recover from the plaintiff, belatedly though.

The judge, however, observed that there was nothing to show that Microcare Health rejected the bills when they all bore stamp with words “processed”; without anything to show that they were rejected.

“To my mind, therefore, the attempt to impeach the said claims by the plaintiff is an afterthought by the defendant in some cases being one year old. This is clearly dilatory conduct on the part of the defendant company,” the judge agreed with Kiwuuwa.

 

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});