Justice Richard Wejuli Wabwire of the Commercial Division of the High Court has issued Court Orders stopping Isaac Kumakech from recovering millions of shillings he gifted to his girlfriend Patience Ngamita before their romantic relationship expired.
In his judgement, Justice Wejuli agreed with Ngamita’s lawyers led by Derrick Bazzekuketta of Gem Advocates that Law Development Centre magistrate Martin Kirya erred in law and fact by allowing Kumakech to recover Shs15m and Shs1m from her girlfriend.
He further ruled that the money was received fraudulently.
“ Having re-evaluated the entire body of the evidence under Ground 5, this Court found that the money sent by the 2nd Respondent to the Appellant was not solely intended for business investment, but was also intended for personal upkeep, rent, maintenance and support of relatives within the broader context of a romantic and cohabiting relationship. The 2nd Respondent failed to discharge the burden of proving that the financial remittances were made in furtherance of a clearly defined business arrangement enforceable at law. The evidence instead indicates a mixed purpose transaction, largely informal and unaccompanied by objective indicators of contractual or fiduciary obligations,” the judge stated.
The judge further wondered the criteria used by the lower magistrate to award Kumakech 25% interest per annual in the matter where there was no agreement signed between the parties noting that the transaction was ambiguous in nature.
He concluded that the award was excessive and unjustifiable in nature, should be reversed and the appellant awarded 75% of the costs of the appeal.
According to court documents, Kumakech and Ngamita met via Facebook app in 2013 and managed their relationship online and during romantic conversation between the two lovebirds, Ngamita kept on proposing business ideas including the establishment of a bar and restaurant business in Kampala and assuring her boyfriend who was studying abroad that she was ready to resign from her job at Finca bank Uganda to handle their business.
In 2017, Kumakech agreed to finance the formation of the business for the girlfriend upon establishing a company which they planned to use to operate the business and the girlfriend sent her a handwritten resignation letter.
He was however shocked later after he found out that she duped him and had faked the letter because she didn’t resign from her job. Instead, she was promoted and transferred from Mbale to Kampala.
However, Ngamita’s lawyers rubbished the submissions and told court that there was no arrangement of establishing a limited company in the names of ‘the living room limited’ that is why Kumakech didn’t present evidence to prove that they opened a bank account to transact the company’s business on.
They insisted that all the money that Kumakech sent to his girlfriend through other parties and mobile money services was for her upkeep.
The lawyers explained to Court that Kumakech decided to institute a case against their client after she ended their relationship.
They added that this was done in bad faith with the aim of revenge for parting ways with him after she established that he was not in her future plans and the two could not form a family together which the judge agreed with.
To prove their case, Ngamita’s lawyers presented to court evidences showing that the money Kumakech sent to her was not to establish a business but for personal use.
They gave the example of the money he sent through a friend for dinner, renting a home in Namugongo, buying a car and maintaining herself to look attractive for Kumakech.
The appellant judge also declared that it was an error for the trial magistrate to allow unenrolled advocate Nicholas Bandonda to represent Kumakech without a practising license even though he explained that the decision resulting from his arguments are not null and void and the client was not responsible for hiring a fake lawyer.
