Wakilii

Robert Cousens v Attorney General (Civil Suit 467 of 1996)

High Court · [1996] UGHCCD 6 · 1996 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for damages arising from shooting by police officers
Decision
Plaintiff awarded special and general damages totalling UGX 51,897,800 plus foreign currency amounts and costs with interest

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

Held that police officers on patrol duty who shot and injured the plaintiff thinking he was a car robber acted in the course of their employment, rendering the Government vicariously liable. The officers failed to take proper precautions or give warning before shooting, amounting to negligence. Plaintiff awarded special damages for medical expenses and travel, and general damages of UGX 50,000,000 for loss of professional diving career and permanent disability.

Outcome

Plaintiff awarded special and general damages totalling UGX 51,897,800 plus foreign currency amounts and costs with interest

Facts

On 28 July 1995 at about 9:00 p.m., the plaintiff, a 25-year-old American professional deep sea diver, was driving through Kibuli in a white Mitsubishi pickup when he stopped at a T-junction. He saw a policeman who gestured and said "ondoka" (go away). As he drove off, he was shot three times in his back from a distance of 40-50 metres. The bullets passed through the vehicle's rear door and seat, entering his body. He reached Kansanga where police officers dragged him from the vehicle. One officer remarked it was a case of mistaken identity. The plaintiff lost substantial blood and was taken to Nsambya Hospital, where emergency surgery removed one severely damaged kidney. Bullets remained lodged in his lung and liver. He was later examined in London and declared permanently unfit to dive. Six police officers in a patrol vehicle were subsequently charged with causing him grievous harm.

Issues

  1. Whether or not the Government is vicariously liable for the acts of the police officers.
  2. Whether the Plaintiff was injured by the actions of the Police.
  3. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs claimed.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the plaintiff.
  • Defendant to pay special damages of UGX 1,897,800.
  • Defendant to pay 1066 US dollars or its equivalent in Uganda currency.
  • Defendant to pay 100 pounds sterling or its equivalent in Uganda currency.
  • Defendant to pay UGX 50,000,000 in general damages to the plaintiff.
  • Defendant to pay costs of the suit.
  • Defendant to pay interest on special damages at the rate of 12% per annum.

Rules and key headnotes

Vicarious Liability — Police Officers — Acts in Course of Duty
The Government is vicariously liable for the wrongful acts of police officers who, while on patrol duty in uniform, in an official patrol vehicle, and pursuing what they believed to be a car robber, shot and injured a civilian.
Negligence — Police — Duty to Warn Before Using Force
Police officers act negligently when they shoot at a fleeing vehicle without taking proper precautions to verify the driver is a criminal, without giving warnings, and without establishing that a crime has been committed or that the vehicle matches a stolen vehicle's description.
Hearsay Evidence — Newspaper Reports — Admissibility
Following the Supreme Court decision in Attorney General v David Tinyefunza, newspaper cuttings are inadmissible as hearsay evidence and cannot be relied upon to prove the facts stated therein.
Special Damages — Requirement of Strict Proof
Special damages representing actual loss must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved with documentary evidence such as receipts for medical expenses, air travel, and vehicle repair costs.
General Damages — Loss of Future Earnings — Calculation
Where a plaintiff was not employed at the time of injury, general damages for loss of future earning capacity should be assessed based on the nature of the professional disability and loss of amenities, rather than by multiplying speculative annual earnings by years of working life. The plaintiff's nationality is immaterial; Ugandan standards apply to incidents occurring in Uganda.

Cases cited (14)

  • Sengnendo v Attorney General (1972) EA 140
  • Attorney General v David Tinyefunza (Constitutional Case No. 1 of 1997)
  • Jovelyn Barunghare v Attorney General (Supreme Court Appeal No. 28 of 1993)
  • Musisi Eirisa and 3 Others v SIETCO (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Appeal No. 24 of 1993)
  • NDYABALEMA & OTHERS - VS- U.T.C. LTD.
  • Christopher Kigundu v UTC Ltd (Supreme Court Appeal No. 7 of 1993)
  • Nagenda v Sabena Belgium World Airlines (HCCS No. 1148 of 1988)
  • DALX -VS - = STEEL NAVIGATION CO. LTD. (1980) 3 All ER 699 at page 701
  • BRITISH TRANSPORT COMMISSION VS- COURLIE 91956) at 185 para 206
  • DAVIES -VS POWELL DUFFREY ASS. COLLIERS (1942) Ac 601 At 617
  • COOKSON -VS KNOWLES (1979) AC 556 AT 575
  • Joseph Mwanga v Sterling Civil Engineering (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1993)
  • Badru Kakika v UTC and 20 Others (HCCS No. 408 of 1990)
  • Sulaiman Kabugo v Attorney General (HCCS No. 891 of 1987)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Robert Cousens v Attorney General (Civil Suit 467 of 1996) [1996] UGHCCD 6 (27 March 1996)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.