A High-Stakes Battle Over Unpaid Commissions: Ugandan Olympian Takes Tech Firm to Court
In a case that could reshape how commission-based deals are enforced in Uganda’s corporate landscape, former Olympian and businessman William Frederick Blick has filed a lawsuit against Samanga Solutions Ltd., demanding Shs 216.8 million ($57,000) in unpaid commission. But here’s where it gets controversial: Samanga denies ever signing a valid agreement, labeling Blick’s claims as fraudulent. This high-profile dispute not only pits a well-known figure against a tech firm but also highlights the growing tensions in Uganda’s procurement ecosystem, where the line between legitimate commissions and disputed claims is increasingly blurred.
Blick alleges that in 2017, Samanga hired him to market their communication equipment to government security agencies, including the Uganda Police Force. According to court filings, his efforts directly led to Samanga securing a Shs 2.16 billion procurement contract. “I arranged meetings, introduced their products, and facilitated the entire process,” Blick stated in an affidavit. “Yet, despite Samanga receiving full payment, they refused to honor our 10% commission agreement.”
But Samanga tells a different story. Represented by Counsel Blair Kalivayo of Orima & Co. Advocates, the company claims Blick’s involvement was minimal and that they won the contract through a competitive bidding process long after his alleged efforts ended. “The so-called commission agreement is a forgery,” asserted Gloria Kairaba, a company manager. “We were stunned to receive a demand notice in 2021, four years after his supposed involvement.”
And this is the part most people miss: Samanga isn’t just defending itself—it’s preparing a counterclaim, accusing Blick of fraud. The company argues that the entire case lacks legal merit and that Blick’s claims are baseless.
In a ruling delivered on October 15, 2025, Justice Susan Abinyo granted Samanga unconditional leave to defend the suit, noting that the dispute “raises serious triable issues of fact and law.” She emphasized that the court must investigate whether the commission agreement was genuinely executed and whether Samanga’s fraud allegations hold water. “The company’s counterclaim provides reasonable grounds for a bona fide defense,” Justice Abinyo added. Samanga has been directed to file its defense within 10 days, with costs to be determined later.
Why This Case Matters
Blick, a former president of the Uganda Olympic Committee, has diversified into consultancy and government contracting in recent years. His case sheds light on a broader issue: the friction between business agents and companies in Uganda’s procurement sector. Agents often claim commissions for facilitating deals between private firms and public institutions, but disputes like this one raise questions about transparency, accountability, and the enforceability of verbal or disputed agreements.
If Blick wins, it could set a precedent for commission-based contracts, making it harder for companies to avoid payment. But if Samanga prevails, it might embolden firms to challenge similar claims more aggressively. What do you think? Is Blick’s claim justified, or does Samanga have a legitimate defense? Could this case change how commission agreements are handled in Uganda? Share your thoughts in the comments—this is one legal battle you won’t want to miss.
