Obol v Gulu Local Government (Civil Suit 6 of 1996) [1996] UGHC 21 (22 April 1996)

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

IN 'THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA

AT GULU

H/C CIVIL SUIT NO. 6 OF 1996

PLAINTIFF REV. FATHER OBOL REKIJO . .

- versus -

DEFENDANT GULU LOCAL GOVERNMENT

BEFORE HON. MR. JUSTICE G. M. OKELLO.

## JUDGMENT

Rev. Fr Obol Renijo, the Plaintiff brought this aetion against the defendant claiming general and Exempifi^y ' damages for unlawful assault on him by servants of the defendant in the course of their employment. The Plaintiff also claimed damages for Pains and suffering as a result of the assault, interest at the rate of 50^ on the decretal amount from the date of filing this suit until payment in full and costs of the suit.

At the hearing, liability was admitted by the defendant who offered to argue only on the quantum of Damages. Submissions were made by counsel of both Parties on quantum of Damages only. This judgment is therefore only on the assessment of damages.

discerned The facts of the case as ' <sup>1</sup> from the evidence on record are as follows:- The Plaintiffis a<sup>43</sup> years old Catholic Priest. He was at the material time a Parish Priest of Awach Catholic Mission. He appeared to have had a misunderstanding with one Angela Lakot who was one of the workers at the Mission. The misunderstanding was over the loss of some keys and other Properties of the Mission 'that had been undei' her control. Following that misunderstanding, the said Angela Lakot was dismissed from her employment by her employer, the Parish Council which also threatened to refer her case to the Local Council or even to

the Police if she did not return the Properties of the Mission within a given period.

The said Angela Lakot responded by reporting to the Chairman Local Council III of Awach Sub-county alleging assault on her by the Plaintiff. Upon that report, the Chairman L. C. III requested the Sub-county Chief of Awach to invite the Plaintiff to a meeting at the Sub-county Headquarters for the purpose of discussing the allegations. The Sub-county Chief sent his Local Government askaris to go and invite the Plaintiff to come to the Sub-county Headquarters to attend the said meeting to discuss the allegation levelled against him.

The askaris who were sent instead acted in a high handed manner towards the Plaintiff:- they arrested him without informing him of the reason for his arrest, they assaulted him, removed his shirt and shoes, tied him with a rope "three piece" style and forced him to run barefooted and without a shirt as they continued to beat and made fool of him that his God had abandoned him. The Plaintiff sustained brain concussion, scalp

haematoma on the left side of his head, bruises (rope marks) around both elbow joints, pains in the right hip, chest, shoulders and neck. He developed loss of memory as a result of the assault. He was treated in Gulu Hospital. Dr. John Kilama (PW5) who examined and treated the Plaintiff assessed his permanent disability at 15%.

Mr. Atare, counsel for the Plaintiff, suggested a figure of 10m/= for general damages because of the gravity of the injuries sustained by the Plaintiff coupled with the humiliating manner in which the Plaintiff was handled. I think that figure is on the higher side.

Mr. Olaa counsel for the defendant cited a number of cases, a great number of which were accident cases which did not offer good guide for the instant case. He then suggested a figure of $1m/$ = for general Damages. That is again to low.

There can be no doubt that assessment of Damages in cases of Pains and Suffering or even of assault and Battery is an hereculean task to the court. Strict uniformity can hardly be determined. Other factors like inflation in our monetary value also account for 'the variations in the amount of Damage award.

It might however be educative to cite earlier cases for guidance. In Patrick Kwarakunda -vs- The Attorney General (.1984) HOB <sup>60</sup> the Plaintiff an Inspector of Police was unlawfully arrested and brutally assaulted. He sustained fractures of various parts of the body and was also unlawfully detained for 124 days during which for seven days he went without something to eat. Liability was admitted like it was in this case. It was also conceded like in this case, that the case was appropriate for an award of Exemplary Damages. By consent, it was agreed that 300,000/= be paid for general Damages and 100,000/= for Exemplary Damages. Court awarded shs. 1,888,000/= including the amount consented to for general damages and Exemplary Damages.

The injuries sustained by the Plaintiff in Kwarakunda<sup>1</sup> s case above were obviously more serious than the injuries sustained by the Plaintiff in the instant case. The Plaintiff in the instant case has himself testified that his loss of memory was improving. The permanent disability in Kwarakunda\* s case was assessed at 40^ while in the instant case the disability of the Plaintiff was assessed at 15%- It is also worth noting that Kwarakunda's case was decided in 1984 when the value of the money was stronger than it is now. The Damage award in that case therefore does not offer a good guide for the instant case.

In PTof Huk -vs- The Attorney General HCCS NO. ^\_6l/94 which was cited by the counsel for the defendant, the Plaintiff, a former Pec tor of the Isiami <sup>c</sup> University in Uganda at MbaleL His

Properties were thrown out of his Residence following his dismissal from his job. He was subsequently arrested and bundled behind a Pick-up to be taken to Kampala. On the way, the motor vehicle in which the Plaintiff was travelling got an accident in which the Plaintiff sustained serious injuries. His permanent disability was assessed at 60%. Court awarded him 10m/= general Damages and another 10m/= Exemplary Damages.

$4 -$

Again the injuries sustained by the Plaintiff in Huk's case were more serious than those sustained by the Plaintiff in the instant case. Considering all the circumstances of this case, I consider a figure of 5 million an adequate compensation as General Damages. So I order.

As for Exemplary Damages, it was conceded on behalf of the defendant that the facts of this case attract an award of Exemplary Damages. Mr. Atare suggested a figure of 8 million shillings. Mr. Olaa counsel for the defendant suggested a figure of $1\mu$ = under this heading.

Exemplary Damages is essentially a punishment for the high handeness of the conduct of the defendant's agent. It is not compensatory. In the circumstances I consider shs. $2m/=$ adequate under this heading. I also award interest on the decretal amount at court's rate from the date of Judgment until payment in full. The defendant is also condemned to pay cost of this suit.

Guilino G. M. Okello

Judge

$22/4/96$ Judgment delivered in the presence of:-Mr. Atare for the Plaintiff. No body for the Defendant. Mr. Oyaro Court Clerk. Judgment delivered.

G. M. Okello

Judge $22/4/96.$