Justice Nambayo of the Civil Division of the High Court has ruled in favor of Kebirungi, ordering Sylvia Mireku, also known as Sylvia Gladness, to compensate her for defamatory statements made in a WhatsApp alumni group. The court found that Mireku's statements were damaging to Kebirungi’s reputation, dignity, and self-esteem.
Facts
The Plaintiff, Kebirungi Sally Sandra, sued the Defendant, Sylvia Gladys Mireku, for defamation over messages posted in their university WhatsApp group, "Stat Class 2004," on June 7th and 8th, 2022. The Plaintiff claims these messages damaged her reputation and is seeking a court declaration that they were defamatory, a retraction and apology from the Defendant, a permanent injunction to prevent further defamatory statements, as well as damages and legal costs. Both parties were classmates at Makerere University (2001–2004), and the WhatsApp group consists of about 54 members.
Holding
Justice Nambayo noted that Mireku's statements were reckless and malicious, portraying Kebirungi as untrustworthy. The defamatory remarks resulted in Kebirungi facing ridicule and professional harm.
The court emphasized that defamatory statements made in public forums, such as WhatsApp groups, can cause significant reputational damage.
In paragraph d of the Plaint, the Plaintiff states that the Defendant published libellous statements, comments and words with malice and with the ill intention to excite the other 54 members of the “stat class 2004” to form adverse opinions or expose the Plaintiff to hatred, contempt or ridicule or injure her in her trade, business, profession, calling, office or to cause her to be shunned by the other members of the aforesaid alumni.
Counsel relied on the case of Geoffrey Ssejjoba –v- Rev. Rwabigonji Patrick, C.S No. 1 of 1976, where it was held that a defamatory statement is one which has a tendency to injure the reputation of the person to whom it refers by lowering him in the estimation of the right – thinking members of society generally and in particular to cause him to be regarded with feelings of hatred, contempt, ridicule, fear, dislike and disesteem”. (underlining is mine for emphasis).
In this case, I find that the above words used against the Plaintiff by the Defendant have the tendency of lowering her image and self-esteem before her colleagues and they are defamatory. The plaintiff’s reputation was injured and the words used have the tendency of lowering the plaintiff’s estimation before her colleagues who she studied with. Therefore, I find that the Plaintiff was defamed by the Defendant. 115
The court awarded UGX 5,000,000 (five million Uganda shillings) to Kebirungi for mental anguish, emotional distress, and reputational harm.
An additional UGX 500,000 (five hundred thousand Uganda shillings) was awarded to punish Mireku for her reckless conduct.
The court also ordered Mireku to bear the costs of the lawsuit.
Key Takeaways
This ruling highlights the legal risks associated with making defamatory statements on digital platforms.
Individuals should exercise caution when discussing financial or personal disputes in public forums, as defamatory speech can result in legal liability and financial penalties.
Read more
.jpg)
Comentários