10.07.2015 Views

By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

The trial judge dismissed appellant’s claim for defamation on the ground that thefirst respondent had the defence of qualified privilege. He dismissed the claim forwrongful termination on the ground that such termination was justified in the lightof the appellant’s proved or admitted misconducts.At the heading of this appeal the appellant was represented by Mr. Lukwarowhile Mr. Muccadam appeared for the respondents. Mr. Lukwaro filed a total ofeight grounds of appeal challenging the dismissal of his client’s suit by the HighCourt and the failure by that Court to award him costs after dismissing hecounter-claim by the second respondent.The learned judge found that the report by the probe team did containstatements, which were defamatory of the appellant. When dealing with thatissue he said inter aliaThere is no doubt that some of the publication is defamatory matters like adulteryimputations and fraud allegations are certainly defamatoryWe are satisfied that this finding was quite justified. There was ample evidence tosupport it. However he misdirected himself by saying that the probe teamsubmitted its report to the general council of JUWATA. For there was abundantevidence of the appellant and the defence witness. One Mr. Mashashi that thereport by the probe team was submitted to the KUBK not to the general council ofJUWATA.As stated earlier, the learned judge found that the first respondents had thedefence of qualified privilege available to it This was so because in his view therewas public duty to investigate into the activities of the W.D.C, and its generalmanager” He took the view that once there was that dirty then in the absence ofany malice and indeed the appellant concede that absence any malice on thepart of members of the probe team, the occasion was one of qualified privilegeIt was established by the evidence that the probe team was appointed by thegeneral council of JUWATA to probe into the affairs of the W.D.C. including thoseof the appellant as its general manager, and report its findings back to the353

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!