UGANDA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY, MUKONO

FACULTY OF LAW

SECOND YEAR EXAMINATION FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF LAWS

LLB YEAR II, FIRST SEMESTER

NATURE AND HISTORY OF TORTS: MARKING GUIDE

COURSE: NATURE & HISTORY OF TORTS

DATE: 9 December 2014

TIME: 09:00am – 12:00pm

INSTRUCTIONS

1. This is a partially closed book examination. Candidates may bring into the examination
room and consult therein ONLY CLEAN COPIES OF THE READING LIST.
2. Answer three questions only. Question ONE is compulsory

Question 1 (Compulsory)

Mary and Paul have been married for three years. Dina, an old girlfriend to Paul has been
frustrating their marriage. As a way of frustrating their marriage, Dina and her two friends Sarah
and Ruth went to Mary’s workplace on a Friday evening, and locked Mary in the restroom with
padlocks after knowing that she was inside as a way of keeping her away from Paul. Mary tried
to call for help but only got rescue after two days.

Dina further called Mary and informed her that Paul had been injured in a fatal motor accident
and that his head had been run over and smashed by a car and that this had led to his death. Dina
had knowledge that the information was not true as Paul was away on a business trip. She
however made Mary believe that it was true. The news about Paul’s fatal accident grossly
affected Mary. Instantly she got hysterical and started vomiting violently. She went without food
or sleep for three days and started experiencing pain all over her body. Because of her status, she
was admitted to Butabika Hospital for two weeks, but she remains mentally unstable.

Dina has recently been known for attacking persons in the neighborhood.
A week ago, Dina approached Paul, as he walked along a sidewalk in the neighborhood. When
she had a face to face with Paul, Dina, without provocation, gestured threateningly and
screamed, "I know you're out to get me and I'm going to get you first," and then strode away.

Paul, who had no knowledge of Dina's recent violent behavior phoned Dina’s mother Phionah
about the incident. Phionah told Paul that "Dina has sometimes made threats to others, but did
not think she will try to hurt anyone and assured Paul that it will not happen again." Paul
believed Phionah’s assurances and, for that reason, did not seek to avoid Dina.

Phionah questioned Dina about the incident and two days after, Dina confronted Paul. Dina saw
him raking leaves which had fallen into the street at the front of their adjoining homes. Dina got
on her bicycle and rode it at a high speed directly towards Paul. Although Dina swerved away
from Paul at the last moment, Paul reacted by diving to one side. He struck his head on the curb
and suffered a severe concussion and facial injuries.

Raise the legal issues and advise the aggrieved parties on the possible causes of action, and
remedies available to them (30 Marks).

ANSWER

Extra mark for student who use - IRAC

Issues
1. Whether there are any causes of action (1mk)
2. What are the possible remedies available to the parties (1mk)

Resolution of issues
Issue 1.
 Assault (6mks)
 Battery (6mks)
 False imprisonment (Akisoferi Bitereno v AG) (6mks)
 Injury without physical contact/ infliction of mental suffering (Wilkinson v Downtown
(1897) 2 QB 57 and Byekwaso v AG [1982] HCB 101 (6mks)
Issue 2.
 Action for damages (4mks)

Question 2

On 4 February 2013, the late Hon. Inyalio Tom, then a Member of Parliament for Nabutiti
Constituency, made certain allegations in the House (Parliament of Uganda) of a very grave
nature regarding certain persons, of whom Hon. Yaledi Elizabeth (Then Ugandan Minister of
Defence ) was one.
The allegations were denied by Hon. Yaledi Elizabeth, who challenged Hon. Inyalio, “If they
were true” to repeat them in a place where parliamentary privilege would not apply. The
allegations, the denial and challenge were published the following day in a newspaper, known as
the Uganda Times, which is published by the Defendant Company. I shall refer to the
publication as “the first report”.

On 11 February 2013, the Late Hon. Inyalio held a Press conference to repeat the statements he
made on the floor of the house, a report of which appeared the following day in the Uganda
Times. He said he was holding the Press conference a reply to a challenge by the Minister of
Defence that he would not repeat his allegations outside the House:

“The reason that I have done this is because I have checked and cross-checked my information
have been convinced that the sons of Uganda who were killed in the Congo were killed not in the
defence of our territorial integrity, but because certain individuals had personal interests in the
conflict that was going on between the Congolese people themselves.”
He said the people of Uganda “would like to know who started the fight between Uganda and
Congo, when this took place, and why it took place. They would like to know how many
Congolese soldiers were captured, killed and wounded, and where and when this happened.
They would like to know how many Ugandans soldiers were captured, killed and wounded.

They would like to be told why gold was brought into Uganda and where it was smelted in
Uganda. They would like to know what steps the Government took to arrest the persons
responsible for importing gold illegally into the country.
They wanted to know what steps had been taken to recover the tax due on the gold because any
importation of mineral was taxed.

“All these questions we would like the Commission mentioned in Parliament to go into,” he
said.
He said the Prime minister and the minister of Defence were both members of the Defence
Council, and so when the commission was appointed these two Ministers should not be
concerned.
I would personally find it extremely difficult to give evidence to a Commission appointed by a
body of which the Prime minister and minister of Defence were members,” he said.

Mrs. Yaledi Elizabeth feels disappointed by the irritating and derogatory statements made by the
Honourable Member of Parliament referring to her. She wants to institute legal action against
him but she is not conversant with the legal principles concerning defamation since her level of
education is Ordinary level.

Advise Hon. Yaledi Elizabeth on the possible causes of action(s), remedies and possible
defences. (20 marks)
 ANSWER
Extra 1 mark for using - IRAC
Issues

1. Whether there is a cause of action?

2. What are the possible defences?
3. What remedies are available?

Resolution of the Issues

Issue 1
 Defamation (2mk) – definition of defamation
 Elements of defamation – statement must be defamatory (the sentence referring to the use
of troops to serve the personal interests of certain individuals), words must be published
and the words must refer to the Hon Yaledi Elizabeth personally. (5mks)
Issue 2
 Justification (2mks)
 Privilege (2mks)
 Fair comment (2mks)
Issue 3
 Damages (2mks)
 Apology (2mks)

Extra 2 marks for citing cases and clarity

Question 3

Although the ruling in Wilkinson v Downtown was a breakthrough in removing barriers that
made it difficult to recover damages in suits arising out of mental suffering, the law still imposed
severe limitations on such claims for victims to recover damages.

Discuss the limitations and the reforms if any that have been instituted to deal with these
limitations (20 Marks)

ANSWER

Students are expected to discuss the limitations in the case of Wilkinson v Downton and the
reforms if any that have been instituted to deal with these limitations. They should analyse the
rule under injury without impact, limitations like remoteness and others.
Question 4

With the aid of authorities and or decided cases, discuss the following:
i. The principles and circumstances under which trespass to land may be deemed to occur
in Uganda, and (15 Marks)
ii. The defences to trespass to land. (5 Marks)

Answer

Definition of trespass to land – (1mk)

Justification for the law on trespass to land (2mks)

Principles (giving the elements with relevant authorities) (6mks)

- There must be an act of entry

- That act of entry must be illegal
- It must be an invasion of the right to the person in possession

Circumstances (giving relevant authorities) (6mks)

- Entering upon land

- Trespass to the airspace
- Trespass to the ground beneath the surface
- When the defendant steps foot on anyone's land
- Drives on it
- When somebody takes possession
- It could also mean expelling the person to possession
- It could also mean pulling down or destroying anything permanently or temporarily
- It could mean fixing something on someone's land

Defences;

Co-ownership (1mk)
Rights of entry (1mk)
Authority by law (1mk)
Necessity (1mk)
License (1mk)
Question 5

Critically examine the application of the law of vicarious liability and its justification (20
Marks)

ANSWER

Students are expected to discuss:

 the concept of vicarious liability (5mks)

 the elements constituting vicarious liability i.e. master/servant relationship and course of
employment (10mks)
 justification for vicarious liability (5mks)

Question 6

“The primary principle is that a plaintiff in tort must prove damage, because the object of the law
is to prevent and redress harm, and if there has been no harm there is no complaint.”

Discuss this statement in light of the different forms of damages awardable under the law
of tort (20 Marks)

ANSWER
The fundamental principle applied to the assessment of an award of damages is that the claimant
should be fully compensated for his or her loss in as far as it is possible in monetary value. There
are different forms of damages that are awarded by the court these are as follows:

Definition of damages with the justification of damages (2mks)

 Special damages (3mks)
 General damages (3mks)
 Aggravated damages (3mks)
 Exemplary damages (3mks)
 Nominal damages (3mks)
 Contemptuous damages (3mks)