Wakilii

Tumusiime v Teddy Ssezi Cheeye and Another (Civil Suit 805 95)

High Court · [1996] UGHC 86 · 1996 Judgment for Plaintiff — Damages Awarded AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for defamation, proceeded ex-parte after defendants failed to appear at hearing
Decision
Judgment entered for plaintiff with general and aggravated damages totaling UGX 10,000,000 plus interest and costs; permanent injunction granted against defendants

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

The court held that the defendants published a defamatory article alleging corruption and embezzlement by the plaintiff, Managing Director of Uganda Railways Corporation. The allegations were false and imputed criminal conduct, injuring the plaintiff's reputation. General and aggravated damages awarded; permanent injunction granted restraining further defamatory publication.

Outcome

Judgment entered for plaintiff with general and aggravated damages totaling UGX 10,000,000 plus interest and costs; permanent injunction granted against defendants

Facts

The plaintiff, Managing Director of Uganda Railways Corporation, sued the defendants for defamation following publication of an article in Uganda Confidential Newsletter dated January 9-16, 1995. The article alleged that the plaintiff had diverted US$300,000 from the Corporation's account to his personal account, ordered that Uganda Posts and Telecommunications Corporation not be billed for equipment rental since 1992 with proceeds going to his personal account, and in connivance with the Board Chairman cleared a warehouse to rent to a coffee exporter for UGX 800,000 monthly. The article further alleged the plaintiff and Chairman spent UGX 13,000,000 on a trip to Nairobi. The plaintiff, a lawyer by profession, presided over a corporation with annual turnover of US$30,000,000 and operations in multiple East African countries. After default judgment was initially entered then set aside on defendants' application, the case proceeded ex-parte when defendants failed to appear at the hearing on June 6, 1996. Evidence showed the allegations were false and no such diversion or embezzlement occurred.

Issues

  1. Whether there was publication by the defendant of the plaintiff.
  2. Whether the publication was defamatory of the plaintiff.
  3. If the first two issues are answered in the affirmative what are the remedies available.

Orders

  • General damages of UGX 7,500,000 awarded to the plaintiff.
  • Aggravated damages of UGX 2,500,000 awarded to the plaintiff.
  • Interest at court rate from date of judgment until payment in full.
  • Permanent injunction issued restraining defendants from publishing defamatory materials of and about the plaintiff.
  • Judgment and orders against defendants jointly and severally.
  • Costs awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Defamation — Libel — Imputation of criminal conduct to public officer
It is libellous to impute to a person in any office corrupt, dishonest or fraudulent conduct or any unfitness or want of ability to discharge duties, whether the office be public or private or one of profit, honour or trust.
Defamation — Innuendo — Words capable of defamatory meaning
Words need not expressly state that a plaintiff committed an offence; the innuendo they import will be regarded to make them defamatory if they are capable of bearing and were understood to bear that meaning.
Defamation — Intention — Lack of intention not a defence
It is no defence in an action for libel that the defendant did not intend to defame the plaintiff.
Defamation — Publication — Presumption of injury to reputation
Once a defamatory publication has been made of the plaintiff, disparagement is presumed to have injured the reputation of the plaintiff for which he is entitled to damages.
Defamation — Defence of justification — Truth as complete defence
If the defendant proves that the words complained of are true, the plaintiff cannot recover damages even if the words were published maliciously.
Defamation — Aggravated damages — Failed plea of justification
A defendant who raises the plea of justification but fails to prove it becomes liable to being condemned to aggravated damages.
Defamation — Aggravated damages — Malice deduced from conduct
Malice is usually deduced by the conduct of the defendant who had the duty in the first place to check the truth of the publication and who failed to apologise when requested.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (14)

  • Beolle v United Insurance [1971] 1 LLR 31
  • Miles v Etomongara [1970] EA 111
  • Lar v Uganda Times [1980] HCB 110
  • Masiko v Uganda Times [1980] HCB 11
  • Richard Kaijuka v Teddy Cheeye (High Court Civil Suit No. 688 of 1991)
  • Gordon Yawaruno v Teddy Cheeye (High Court Civil Suit No. 651 of 1995)
  • Tumusiire Mutebile and Another v Teddy Cheeye (High Court Civil Suit No. 341 of 1992)
  • Fitter and Another v Uganda Argus Ltd [1961] EA 168
  • Hulton and Another v Jones [1910] AC 20
  • East African Standard v Gitau [1970] EA 611
  • Alexandrov v Ilner [1921] EALR 18
  • Associated Leisure Ltd v Associated Newspapers Ltd [1970] 2 QB 450
  • John Nafenda v The Monitor Publication Ltd and Another (High Court Civil Suit No. 696 of 1992)
  • Kiwancu [I erruri Mr [?Mersrerve Jrd] v Cheeye [8uora]

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Tumusiime v Teddy Ssezi Cheeye and Another (Civil Suit 805 _ 95) [1996] UGHC 86 (28 October 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.