Ex-city tycoon Bryan White has been ordered by court to clear $ 160,000 debt for a Mercedes
Benz he acquired from business man Alex Binyenda.
The accused was sued by Binyenda through his legal representation of Wameli and Company
Advocates back in 2018 over a sum of $ 160,000 balance that h had failed to clear after buying a
According to court documents, Brian Kirumira popularly known as Bryan White had previously
in April 2018 made a deal with Binyenda to purchase a car from him although he later took it
without authorization and did not make a complete payment.
“The defendant then entered negotiations with the plaintiff to buy the car until the parties
agreed on $260,000. That following this, in May 2018, the defendant by agreement purchased
the plaintiff’s motor vehicle at a total of $260,000 and that he paid $100,000 leaving a balance
of $160,000,” reads the complaint.
This ruling was passed by Justice Jeanne Rwakakooko of the Commercial Division of the High
Court in which he instructed Bryan White to pay a 6% interest on top of the UGX 566 million
debt from May 2018 till the date of judgement and all legal costs the complaint had to endure.
“The defendant (Kirumira) having admitted that there is indeed a balance on the purchase price
of $160,000, the plaintiff is therefore entitled to the sum of $160,000, being the balance of the
purchase price of the suit motor vehicle purchased by the defendant. Interest shall also be
allowed,” Justice Rwakakooko finalized.
Previously, Binyenda says he tried to contact Kirumira but in vain as he kept on dodging him or
going into hiding while made him file a case at the police following numerous failed attempts to
reach Bryan White.
Although Brian White tried to defend himself on grounds that Binyenda defiled their contract
since he used police to confiscate the car.
“The defendant consented to buy the said car with the intention to be bound and therefore it is
presumed that since the description/details of the suit vehicle are clearly laid out in the log
book, the defendant should have taken note of the same before the said purchase and or
carried out due diligence before purchasing the said vehicle rather than after the purchase was
made as alleged,” Justice Rwakakooko stated.