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
New Vision Printing and Publishing Company Limited v Opika Opoka (Civil Appeal No. 21 of 2013) [2021] UGCA 88 (18 March 2021)
The Court of Appeal held that a newspaper article referred to Opika Opoka and was defamatory, but reduced general damages from UGX 75 million to UGX 45 million.
Ejidra v New Vision Printing and Publsihing Company Limited & Another (CIVIL SUIT NO. 217 OF 2013) [2019] UGHCCD 263 (17 May 2019)
The court found that the article in question was an accurate, unbiased, and fair report of a community dispute regarding land grabbing, an issue of significant public interest. The publication was not malicious or defamatory, as it merely reported accusations made at a public meeting and did not sensationalize or misrepresent the facts. The Defendants, as a national newspaper and its editor, had a duty to inform the public about such matters, and the public had a corresponding interest in receiving this information. The publication was therefore protected by qualified privilege. The court als…
Source excerpt
Editor in Chief & Printing, Publishing Company New Vision v Sekandi & Anor (Civil Appeal No. 33 of 2011) [2013] UGHCCD 16 (1 February 2013)
The High Court found that the substance of the published article was true: the respondents had been arrested and detained on suspicion of stealing a cow, and this was accurately reported. The subsequent investigation, which established the cow belonged to one respondent, was not part of the story at the time of publication. The timing of the article, though after the respondents' release, did not alter the truth of the events as reported. The trial magistrate erred in focusing on the timing and malice, rather than the substantial truth of the publication. Since justification (truth) was estab…
Source excerpt
David Opwonya, Andrew Ajure v Attorney General & anoer (Civil Suit No.10 Of 2007) (Civil Suit No.10 of 2007) [2008] UGHC 136 (27 November 2008)
The High Court of Uganda found that a radio broadcast defamed two municipal officials and awarded them general damages, while dismissing the claim against the Attorney General.
The Editor Sunday Monitor and Others v Wabomba Mutenyo and Another (Civil Appeal 60 of 2002) [2004] UGCA 33 (21 July 2004)
The Court of Appeal of Uganda held that qualified privilege applied to newspaper publication of a letter alleging corruption, and allowed the appeal.
The Editor Sunday Monitor and Others v Wabomba Mutenyo and Another (Civil Appeal 60 of 2002) [2004] UGCA 35 (21 July 2004)
The Court of Appeal found that the articles in question were mere reproductions of a letter authored by the Chairman of the Industrial Division Council, which was verified by the journalist before publication. The court held that the appellants, as journalists, had a legal, moral, and social duty to inform the public about corruption in public bodies, a matter of significant public interest. The court rejected the trial judge's inference of malice, noting that the articles did not contain editorial comment or excessive language attributable to the appellants. The court concluded that the defe…
Source excerpt
Samuel Wako Wambuzi v Editor in Chief Red pepper & Anor (Civil Suit No. 305 of 2015) [2017] UGHCCD 38 (4 May 2017)
The court found that the publication was false and defamatory of the Plaintiff. The Defendants failed to prove the truth of the statements and admitted the falsity both in evidence and in a subsequent publication. The article imputed dishonesty and financial irresponsibility to the Plaintiff, a highly respected retired Chief Justice, thereby lowering his reputation in the eyes of right-thinking members of society. The apology published by the Defendants did not meet the required standard and did not mitigate liability. The Plaintiff was entitled to substantial general and exemplary damages, a…
Source excerpt
