Uganda Performing Rights Society v MTN (U) Ltd (Civil Suit No. 287 of 2010)
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 plaintiff had locus standi to sue in its own name under a reciprocal representation agreement empowering it to enforce foreign copyright owners' rights without requiring a power of attorney. However, the suit was dismissed for disclosing no cause of action, as the plaintiff failed to prove that the UB40 members who performed at the defendant's concert were the same individuals who had assigned their performing rights to the foreign collecting society.
Outcome
Suit dismissed for failure to prove cause of action
Facts
In February 2008, the defendant contracted UB40, a UK band, to perform a concert at Lugogo grounds in Kampala. The plaintiff, a registered collecting society in Uganda, claimed that UB40 members had assigned their performing rights worldwide to the Performing Rights Society of UK (PRS UK), with which the plaintiff had a reciprocal representation agreement. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant organized the concert without obtaining a license or paying performance royalties to the plaintiff, and sought a declaration of unauthorized performance, special damages of 3% of gate collections, general damages, interest, and costs. The defendant argued that UB40 members retained personal performance rights despite any assignment and that it was duly authorized by UB40 to organize the concert. At trial, the plaintiff failed to prove that the UB40 members who actually performed at the Kampala concert were the same individuals who had assigned their rights to PRS UK.
Issues
- Whether the plaintiff has locus standi to sue the defendant.
- Whether the plaintiff has a cause of action against the defendant.
- Whether the defendant is liable to pay royalties to the plaintiff.
Orders
- Suit dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the defendant.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (12)
- Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act 2006 s.3
- Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act 2006 s.14(1)(a)
- Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act 2006 s.14(1)(b)
- Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act 2006 s.44(1)
- Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act 2006 s.46
- Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act 2006 s.58(c)
- Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act 2006 s.58(d)
- Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act 2006 s.58(i)
- Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act 2006 s.81
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 3 rule 2
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 7 rule 14
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 10
Cases cited (12)
- Performing Rights Society Ltd v Grand Theatres Ltd [1970] 1 EA 576
- Oboth Marksons Jacob v NRM (Miscellaneous Application No. 108 of 2010)
- Jeshang Popat Shah v Meera Investments (Miscellaneous Application No. 747 of 2002)
- Mugoya Construction and Engineering Ltd v Central Electricals International Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 699 of 2011)
- Johan Sebataana v Abanenamar Yorokam (Civil Suit No. 99 of 2005)
- Mrs. Tereza Beatrice Nalumaga Nyaika v Prince Patrick Olimi Kaboyo (CS No. DR MFP 12/90)
- Cellutant Kenya Ltd v Music Copyright Society of Kenya Ltd [2009] eKLR
- Auto Garage v Motokov (No. 3) [1971] EA 514
- Performing Right Society Ltd v Harlequin Record Shops Ltd (1972) 2 All ER 828
- Eladam Enterprises Ltd v S.G.S (U) Ltd & others (Civil Appeal No. 20 of 2002)
- KCC v Nakaye (1972) EA 446
- Ronald Kasibante v Shell Uganda Ltd (HCCS No. 542 of 2006)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.