[2016] UGHRC 1

[2016] UGHRC 1

The Tribunal found that the applicant's evidence, corroborated by witnesses and medical records, established on a balance of probabilities that he was subjected to intentional physical harm by police officers acting in the course of their employment. The Respondent, having failed to contest the evidence, was held...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] UGHRC 1
Parties
Applicant: Chris Upakmungu; Respondent: Attorney General
Court
Uganda Human Rights Commission
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Complaint UHRC 80 of 2007
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint / Decision
Outcome
complaint allowed
Judges
Hon. (RTD) Justice Gideon Tinyinondi - Commissioner
Legal Topics
Torture and Cruel Inhuman Treatment, Vicarious Liability, Compensation for Rights Violation
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Torture and Cruel Inhuman Treatment Vicarious Liability Compensation for Rights Violation

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chris Upakmungu

Applicant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint / Decision

  1. 1 Whether the Complainant's right to protection against torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment was violated by the Respondent's agents.
  2. 2 Whether the Complainant has any remedy available in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the applicant's evidence, corroborated by witnesses and medical records, established on a balance of probabilities that he was subjected to intentional physical harm by police officers acting in the course of their employment. The Respondent, having failed to contest the evidence, was held vicariously liable for the violation of the applicant's constitutional right to protection against torture, cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. The Tribunal applied relevant constitutional and statutory provisions to conclude that the applicant was entitled to compensation for the violation of his rights.

Court Disposition

complaint allowed

Orders

  • The Respondent is ordered to pay to the Complainant a sum of Ugshs 1,300,000 (one million and three hundred thousand shillings only).
  • Interest at 10% per annum to be paid on the mentioned amount calculated from the date of this decision until payment in full.