infringement and any benefit accruing to the Defendant by reason of the infringement. I agree
with the above statutory grounds because they reflect the traditional grounds for award of
aggravated damages. Firstly the Defendant acted in flagrant disregard of the Plaintiff‘s rights.
Secondly the work was used for its thematic content and was made to blend richly with the
Defendant‘s message. The word ―benefit‖ cannot be used to mean pecuniary benefit only. The
work was used to benefit the Defendant‘s cause or campaign because of its content and
appropriateness to the Defendant‘s message. Using it in that fashion without acknowledgement
or apology is a blatant disregard of the Plaintiff‘s Copyright which is protected by statute.
Furthermore it is in the interest of promoting property rights of artists guaranteed under the
Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act 2006 that effective interventions are made to protect
artists so that their industry may thrive. The Plaintiff‘s Counsel thought that an award of Uganda
shillings 100,000,000/= would be fair.
Taking into account the fact that the Defendant is a charity for public purposes, the Plaintiff is
awarded additional (aggravated damages) of Uganda shillings 30,000,000/=.
The plaintiff‘s Counsel prayed for an award of interest at court rate from the date of judgment till
payment in full. In the premises, interest is awarded at the rate of 8% per annum as prayed for on
the above sums from the date of Judgment till payment in full and as enabled by section 26 of the
Civil Procedure Act.
Lastly costs follow the event and the Plaintiff is awarded costs of this suit.
Judgment delivered in open court the 18th day of August 2014
Christopher Madrama Izama
Judge
Judgment delivered in the presence of
Benson Tusasirwe for the plaintiff
Paul Asiimwe for the defendant
Plaintiff in court
Defendant appears through by Abbas Kigozi Programme Officer of defendant
Charles Okuni: Court Clerk