Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Uganda decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Okwenda v Woodson (Civil Suit 55 of 2019) [2023] UGHCCD 188 (30 June 2023)
The High Court dismissed the plaintiff’s defamation claim but upheld the defendant’s counterclaim, granting an injunction, UGX 20 million in damages, and costs.
Dr. Ekure v Odaet (Civil Suit No. 41 of 2019) [2023] UGHC 32 (17 January 2023)
The High Court dismissed a defamation claim against the fourth defendant, finding no proof that she published or caused publication of the newspaper articles.
Atiku v The Editor-in-Chief of The Red Pepper Publications & 2 Others (CIVIL SUIT NO. 28 OF 2014) [2020] UGHCCD 28 (26 March 2020)
High Court defamation suit over newspaper and online publications about human trafficking. Court found the articles defamatory but applied qualified privilege and awarded general damages.
Malinga v Babirye (Civil Appeal Number 49 of 2010) [2014] UGCA 134 (1 February 2014)
The Court of Appeal held that a letter to estate-related third parties was defamatory and awarded the appellant general damages, finding justification and fair comment failed.
Kachontori v Kirunda (Civil Suit No. 62 of 2009) [2012] UGHC 203 (2 October 2012)
The High Court held that a radio broadcast defamed the plaintiff by falsely portraying him as corrupt and criminal, awarding damages, costs, and an injunction.
Joseph Kimbowa Lutaaya v Francis Tumuheirwe (Civil Suit No.862 of 2001) (Civil Suit No.862 of 2001) [2005] UGHC 56 (7 October 2005)
The High Court held that a memo accusing the plaintiff of theft and fraud was defamatory, rejected qualified privilege, and awarded general damages.
Difas Munialo v Editor Sunday Vision Newspaper & Ors (Civil Suit No.1257 of 1997) [2004] UGHC 25 (10 September 2004)
The High Court of Uganda held that a newspaper article calling the plaintiff a “ghost headmaster” was defamatory and awarded general damages, interest, and costs.
The Editor Sunday Monitor and Others v Wabomba Mutenyo and Another (Civil Appeal 60 of 2002) [2004] UGCA 34 (21 July 2004)
The Court of Appeal held that Sunday Monitor’s publication was protected by qualified privilege and set aside High Court defamation damages.
