nangale others vs kasulwa others 1998 tzhc 16 16 november 1998

iINTHEHIGH COURT OF TAN~ANTA DAR ES ~AtAAH DISTRICT REGISTRY J A.T_P ~E....I~_BA r AA~ I CI'VIfJ C~~E NO. 141 OF1 C)98 MR. GEORGE NANGAtE ANO{;'2 OTHF.RS PLAINTTFF VERSlJ~~ SAM KASULWA AND 4 OTHERS DRFF.NDANTS ~T'!J JLr; Ii: ~LJ\ N.5 ,-.,",,- J{"I!F~m;;v A1-L'J. "i'*:"~.::.:··"'':' ~~ >:. i -''''' . .. ~- ,.;'_:).~~~~.;;: Thr'! ti1t' plaint i f fs .. Nangtile (1 s t p 1 i'li nl jf f ), Mrs. Nangn 1e 7.. G. (?nd~}laintiff and')Jy;mzuia origln~~ TFln7.anli'l Lt.d t\i'l Links Trninin'J Centre (3rcl plaint.iff) sued jointly find l4everillJy .. SAlII ~t; 'l{rlSllkWfl. Jfm Gndw.in .. Editor Thet:xprps:-~: Hedii'l Holding ('1') Lid Rn~ RAt ional New~paper ttd (1st ~5t.h DefendRnts respertively' for de flll1at~on, In i mtngamong others .. "(,1) Damages of Shilling A 500,000,000/= (h) Int.erest on (a) at. 40%/pel ilnnUIn fr'OI1\ M;!rTh 'lqcj7 h) the .dat.e«:)f jU,dgement. '\ Interest on'·thede(~retitJ slim at COllt't rn t.A fnHn cl;:ltp. of 'judgement.untiJ. pilyment. in full". '{'hA defpndant.s havinqfailed to file their vll'ittpn r,,1ill.f'IlHHlt of de f encf'~ (thouah'serJ~d)'!~he olaint iff s Wp r'e i'l11owed to prOVf-' t.heir ('lil~ms e:p;tte/,by'~£fi(1~vit IIPlIce flIp ~)respnt jllclgelllPrl1 ~~;';i:: ':"j' ~:,~'-J-".:l i"'/ Tn Hllpport 6f theirO"elairnB plaint iff S\llllllil.tf~(l two i'l f fi di'lv it g deponed b~ t~t:ila.nfl ?nd p 1;'1 i n t. if f f->. Tn I lit'!it· pI rd n

I ~-,<;~~,:" \ ,;,\\','.:." j'hp plaintiff clc:1imedth~Con ,-,;,-.;'" or/.al)()llt ?Olh FHhnliHy 1997 i-ll pages 1 And 2 of "the' F.~~resstl i;ssup No . ..tor, TSSN ORSh- :iQR'1", and sever·ally. ;-'_:,; fill :.;(.\1 If ilnd IHA 1 i ('i OilS 1y pn'parell for publication, edited, printed ;;n;1 ('ire'lllnled nn "rticle pntitled: "Ovnr f~,000 lured 'i~f,' .' :~fH~konl"', 'sh ill i nqq wi SA: POIHI<] as,~rJonllon f nolf~h' and whose:;'i¢ontent~, among () I hers rlln ;'if) Ilnder, "H\llH~rE!ld;of young Tat:!zat1;~ns;an~ n .•porl p<ny fnll ing for ll1rA elf hetter future ptont:fitiJ!d by eomputHl MHl hw'{inesl'; l';tllrlieR in Britain. But once '~e, they gel t hf'! lpels! 11H"Y b,lrgained for".. Thp conspiracy Rllege revo]vAs ilt/lund ri TiHl7.dni;-lll (",)1mle, identified as';,' and Mn..;. H1lioi'llH: \'111(1 rll11 ..., ~,illdent placement pro~itamme in DAr p~; 8nlnnlll on IJehalf of " berkshir'e based Comp"er training institute, lhe fllt.lln~ Rlu..;i.ness College". The re]p'/ant, article is Ann, toithe plajltt. The p1;1inl iff (~lp1\1lt lhrlt. "tlH~ tendt', content, ma rbf hea(l1ng ,1ncl pOl';ition in the .~, , ·"Xi:';· newspaper' i'lS ~~l as its acc anying C:nrtn()nl(~ 11Apict ion clpiHly .>''''$~ " i tld icatR lOali.d'~" aimed' at por in i nnlllendo iHlll by ::~f;,t~{· " j\lxtnposition)~fthe plaintiff s sd')ertlprR, (Tilllinnls, ;,""'! c:onSp j r Al ors /t~'V i 1 ,doers I y,

pprjllred .. swi 11(11Ars who ;HP ;<~,~~rc lInf it to hold\~1tny responsib fficA as well rlS irll~rlpi'ihle of ,;<.". '." carry] n~l out ?! thfdr "duties "an 'phjects as cOl1f"inp.ll in UIP-ir .. IllPJnor'and, of ASROCiatton 1.it;l,d f thA hnnf,::t melllhArR 'of their I hAy d; :::;,H~SOC i ate d illlliH] f> S t 0 m;:Jkp. good t.he of thpir ni'lllleR which stnnd LHn 1 Shf~d. \ Havin plninl am] i 1.s iHHlAXLllreR: t.hereof the court 1s of is defAIllAtory and false. al r Aady qlloLe<l above: and paint the pli'lintiffs, at the least I a::; nts to part with their money for sHrvices wh istpnt or lH'!low the Rli'lndi'lrds requj r~c1 find expect.ed. And t.hi f> can furl het hp c1~fWPtnpd f 1-0111 other f)'X('prpts of t.hat article which run "R II1HlfH, "The Na~gales and.the.~ ..goll~?e i~re ch;:Il':J i IIg the i r B tudentR 1()OO ~terling (.+.6':W:i.lli~h) in tuition fees per year, hut the G60d samar(t~n";iwear£~that the highest a cornputer :~:''.'-, ~-',' -;,~'. :---;~r:::::'&:.:-'~~,~:"~-);-' t li'lining centre?~can:charge anywherei n the 11K is 700 sterling (700,000/=) a year. At thi'lt, what theifhest comput.er school ('hArge for a year's course of inst.ruction is exactly what the N,ll1gAlp.s chrlrge a sin<,1le proRpective st.udent hConslIltation fee" fl 1 0 n e. . . . ..••••..•.•.. :·f ••• NAngale jHl(l~lfe ~hrOU~h links trAining centre JI(J11sed in a single

studi'rJ:!at :r~t'~;':~t_ -,:~t~:;; the slbo- - :' ~tfalong ~,\\~,t\i~:i Rihi Tit i Jv1ohAnH~cl ROAd hoast of heingahle to~proV traj ning oppot turd t. i eR i'lrHl jobs in ,-<:" ~:,y ';;';" ,~; • -.'.;,jo.~ ~h Clei1rly, from',theabov., l~int iffs lAst eem find reRl'ed", i'llllong _~ _ :)j' (.'_/:i::,,';)~:<',_ '.'''':/ .?fj,.-, the ordl tli1rYJ'memhers 0.£' OU.r c~ety must hi1v(~ been lowerecl wi th a consequence 6f:'being ~Wun~~' aw~y for be ing In inted with unreliable, dubious ~~d Jh tlstworthy ,.,:.: ,/:J~}'.7 char;lcteristics let alone heing looked upon as c$nmen\~Fl()wing from thnt, thei rhus; neRS t~~_>_ - _;::~!:"~,' c' would ni'ltllral1y have b"een affected for no pntentii'\l RtllClent. W0111d , ,-:~r~;~~Jj;".,~:;~Z,~ ngnin rif;k dealing wi cl1lir of the ;Hlvert.iRec1 type. 'fhi'll Rettle(l, .ne what should he rewnroed i'lsrecom~e:~~ face and hll~ineRH. 'fhe p 1 a 1 nt iff s claim.$,OOi 1. from TntereF\t. 'fhe gentlemen ::_'_-_~ "';.'( ,';~:' ';':':~-~~~_~t- f1SReFlROn~ hayee' 18 n<;l vi flWS in Un'lIls of qlli~nl.lllll. 1,--;,':/,,' 25111. 'T'tlf~Y hrwe A.ll exprflssell j ffR I t;:n ni F\hecl nAlIle deserve T have carflfully considered;l;fthpjr view~; ;HId weighed the Silffie with t.he :;tatus of the Plaintift~! the pot.PIII ii'll iTI bllRinesR and t hp exten f of. the are~ ~overed ~!lahe sa j rl elf' f rlm,dory pUb 1 i r.n t j on ,:'~' ;,>'" ':,:,{:',':,

,3g:~tf'-":, iHHl T ht'lv!~ come t.o settle on a tJi:gure Romehow "./~' "~;"':,,:-:t below the propOR it ions opined by thegent: i~men asseSSfl n~, • ' ;io-~:·;";·:" :';.:< No dnubt},;,lhe is p i f£~;is a person of sounrl stat.IIR iJR portlayed in his affid~v a holder of a first degrPH in l\grir.ultur'al Engineering, master of scipncp de<;.lree in renewahle Energy and Master of Business administrrJtiorl, a Technical MrHlnger in F.qllity Tnvest.ment Management. Ltd .. Memher ()f Rn;:nd of Directors of '1'TB, ,"lnrl had held various key positions .. in 1Il1lnja Wrl VijnllA (CCM), Ki lombero Sugar coy, Director of t.hA~ld plaintiff) hilt his hrls n"t established how he reached ,it RlI,~. ?no:ooo ..OOO/= of his worthqnRs.').part from the Fla!d 1F1t Plai"l iff: th~ ?nd and 1fd plaintiff~..; have not been sufficiently pr'ovp!J 10 havp. rt rpknowll fOCdl rltt t',Jetion both locally and internalin1!;'lll,! if we put' asidA t he link in business which WI'1SSUbjf'Ct. of t hp al t rwk hy I hI" t("levAnt 1 ihellolls article. Neither was evidHrlCe slJfficifHltly pstfiblish,~<1 whi.ch show thflt the~3rd plrlinliff hi-l~; '(J~;I hllHinpss pntrmtifll to fl tune of shs. 15Q,OOO:OOO/= ('lrliH1r~tl ;'lS PI'H af f jdavi t find so is the CAse ?nd Defend,nlf'. A1] in a 11 , ! am sat i ~f at the daflli~ge call Red by I,he Jibellbus flrticle to all the p 1a j n ti f f f; r:fl n })f! At. () n An b y

fl 1 i her-I'll Sllll1 to. a tune :0£ on sh ill i ngR wit i ch .i s hereby aWflrded. AR observed by asseSRur:.:; tliA plrlint.iffs are fllRO Antitl,dto commenr:i n9 from th8 d1ite when t.he defamat.ory art.ic 1ished blll la! hAf' fn)1Tl the (1 fl t. e not 40% AS ('l.lilll~d (whose basis WflR not established) ld be at Ihp nlling Rank rAtA. Judgement is enter'ed in favour of t.he plaintiffs in t.llP. terms AS indi~ated i'lhovewith costs. t.. R. KalegeY(3) ,JUDGE- 1fi\11 \q8 neJivere~ in the presence 0 the plaintiffs (1st i3nd ?n~) And Mr. Ki'llolo, today the 16th November, 1.998. AT DAR E8 8ALAAM.:~c/ B. KaJegeya) ',2.tILliQ.Y. f) mpo r'f,i' 1995 xtVT2BJ';'