george nangale others vs sam kasulwa others 1998 tzhc 2029 16 november 1998

george nangale others vs sam kasulwa others 1998 tzhc 2029 16 november 1998

The article in question was found to be defamatory and false, as it portrayed the plaintiffs as conmen and untrustworthy individuals, thereby lowering their reputation and affecting their business. The plaintiffs are entitled to compensation for the damage caused.

Citation
george nangale others vs sam kasulwa others 1998 tzhc 2029 16 november 1998
Parties
Plaintiff: George Nangale; Plaintiff: Mrs. Nangale Z.G.; Plaintiff: Nyanzula Origins Tanzania Training Centre; Defendant: Sam Kasukwa; Defendant: Jim Godwin; Defendant: Editor The Express; Defendant: Media Holding (T) Ltd; Defendant: National Newspaper Ltd
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
16 November 1998
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Ex Parte Proof
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiffs
Legal Topics
Defamation, Libel, Damages
Source Language
English
Tort Defamation Libel Damages

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Nangale

Plaintiff

Mrs. Nangale Z.G.

Plaintiff

Nyanzula Origins Tanzania Training Centre

Plaintiff

Sam Kasukwa

Defendant

Jim Godwin

Defendant

Editor The Express

Defendant

Media Holding (T) Ltd

Defendant

National Newspaper Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Ex Parte Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the published article was defamatory and false
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to damages and interest

Ratio Decidendi

The article in question was found to be defamatory and false, as it portrayed the plaintiffs as conmen and untrustworthy individuals, thereby lowering their reputation and affecting their business. The plaintiffs are entitled to compensation for the damage caused.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiffs

Orders

  • Defendants to pay plaintiffs ten million shillings as general damages for defamation
  • Interest on the decretal sum at the ruling bank rate from the date of judgment until payment in full