The High Court allowed a defamation appeal, holding that the appellant had justified most statements as true, fair comment, and privileged, so damages fell away.
The publication was defamatory as it contained imputations likely to lower the respondent’s reputation, expose him to ridicule, and was not substantiated by truth. The appellants acted with reckless disregard for truth, establishing malice. The defence of fair comment fails as the facts were not true. The apology, though relevant, was partial and coerced, mitigating damages only to an extent. The damages awarded were excessive given lack of evidence on circulation and respondent’s subsequent appointment; quantum reduced to Tshs 150,000,000.
The High Court dismissed a civil appeal over a village contract, holding the appellant failed to prove breach or defamation and that the termination letter was fair comment.
The High Court granted a temporary injunction restraining further allegedly defamatory publications against the applicant pending determination of the main suit.
The court found that the applicant had merit in his application as the respondents were likely to continue publishing defamatory material, and the alleged defences of qualified privilege and fair comment were not substantiated by the content of the publications. The court held that there was no public interest or fair comment in the publications and granted the temporary injunction.