Namutebi sent her sister Shs 400m to construct for her rentals in Busega. The sister ‘ate’ the money and defeated her in court

In 2006, Mariam Namutebi, who was living and working in Switzerland, wanted to construct a three-storeyed rental house on her land at Busega, Kampala.

She started sending her sister Hadijja Nassuna money to oversee the project.

Namutebi says she entered a verbal agreement with Nassuna under which she would receive money from her, buy building materials, hire professionals, supervise construction and ensure that the house was completed.

In return, Namutebi said she would look after Nassuna’s children by paying their school fees. She also allowed her to live in her property without paying rent.

According to Namutebi, between March and December 2007, she sent about Shs 300 million for construction purposes. Then between January 2008 and November 2009, she sent Shs103.2 million to Nassuna through Western Union.

So altogether, she claimed to have sent Shs 402.2 million.

For years as she worked in Switzerland, she was hopeful that the construction project was moving on well. In fact, Nassuna occasionally sent her photos, showing the progress of the project.

In 2012, Namutebi travelled to Uganda for her Christmas holidays expecting to see a mega structure. To her shock, she only saw a foundation which was incomplete. She fainted.

When she recovered, Nassuna allegedly assured her that building materials were still being delivered and that construction would continue. She gave her the benefit of doubt and returned to Switzerland.

Nassuna, like in the past, continued sending her photos of the project, but in 2015, Namutebi came back again.

The house was still nowhere to be seen, and she concluded that something had gone terribly wrong.

She took Nassuna and another relative, Salim Kivumbi, to court, accusing the duo of receiving the money, failing to construct the building and refusing to refund her.

In court, Nassuna, putting on a brave case, said there was never any formal contract requiring them to build a three-storeyed house for Namutebi. She challenged Namutebi to produce it if it was there.

Instead, she said she was merely helping her as a sister. She conceded that Namutebi would occasionally send money together with instructions on how it should be spent.

The money, she said, was used for various purposes, including construction expenses, school fees and household bills. But, she insisted, there was no formal agreement regarding the construction of the house.

Justice Boniface Wamala looked puzzled but after carefully examining the statements from the different parties, he said under Ugandan law, a contract involving such large sums should ordinarily be in writing.

“There is no certainty over the actual agreement between the parties or the terms thereof,” Justice Wamala ruled.

Justice Wamala said Namutebi and Nassuna gave completely different accounts of what had been agreed.

He also found that Namutebi had not produced sufficient evidence proving exactly how much money had been sent and under what terms.

Justice Wamala said that the most reliable documentary evidence produced by Namutebi showed that Nassuna had received about Shs103.2 million through Western Union.

He said Nassuna had provided explanations about how the money was used and that Namutebi had failed to produce stronger evidence disproving those explanations.

He said there was also insufficient evidence proving that Namutebi was supporting Nassuna’s children and concluded that the arrangement appeared to be a family understanding between siblings rather than a commercial agreement.

As a result, Justice Wamala found that no contract had been breached, so he rejected Namutebi’s claim for a refund of the money.

He held that a person seeking recovery of money must prove that the recipient received funds without providing the agreed service and would be unjustly enriched by keeping the money.

In this case, the court found that the burden had not been met.

“The plaintiff has not established any possibility of unjust enrichment on the part of the defendants since no money has been proved to have been received and retained by them,” the judge stated.

The court eventually dismissed the entire case.

“In view of the findings under Issues 1 and 2 above, the suit by [Namutebi] has wholly failed and is accordingly dismissed,” Justice Wamala ruled.

Although Nassuna won the case, the court declined to award her legal costs because of the close family relationship involved.

Justice Wamala’s ruling should serve as a warning to Ugandans living abroad that major financial arrangements involving relatives should be properly documented or else they will lose their money.

Read Next Article