Facts
The plaintiff, Basajjabaka Yakub, sued MTN Uganda Ltd for using his photograph on a billboard without his consent. The billboard was displayed at Entebbe International Airport (EIA) between 2010 and 2012. Basajjabaka claimed that the use of his image caused him stress, as people assumed he had received substantial financial compensation from MTN Uganda. The defendant, MTN Uganda, denied the plaintiff's claims and argued that the photograph was not easily recognizable and that its use was not unlawful.
Issue
Whether the plaintiff has a cause of action against the defendant.
Whether the billboard at Entebbe International Airport contained the plaintiff’s image between 2010-2012.
If the above issues are resolved in the affirmative, whether the plaintiff’s constitutional right to privacy was infringed by the defendant.
Rule
Article 27 of the Constitution of Uganda guarantees the right to privacy, prohibiting unlawful interference with a person’s home, correspondence, communication, and property. Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) also protects individuals from arbitrary or unlawful interference with their privacy, family, home, or correspondence.
Analysis
Whether the billboard contained the plaintiff’s image
The court found, based on testimonies and photographic evidence, that the plaintiff’s image was indeed on the billboard. Witnesses corroborated the plaintiff’s account, and the defendant admitted ownership of the billboard in question.
Cause of Action
The plaintiff argued that his image was used without consent, leading to stress and endangerment. The court noted that while the Constitution does not explicitly address the use of photographs taken in public spaces, the ICCPR’s broader privacy protections apply. Thus, the unauthorized use of the plaintiff’s image on a billboard established a cause of action.
Infringement of Privacy
The court adopted the approach used in European and English law, where reasonable expectation of privacy in public spaces is considered. It concluded that while taking a photograph in a public space might not infringe privacy rights, publishing that image for commercial gain without consent did infringe on the plaintiff’s right to privacy.
Remedies
The plaintiff sought general damages, punitive damages, a permanent injunction, and costs. The court awarded nominal damages of 40,000,000 UGX for the infringement of privacy rights. It declined to award punitive damages due to the lack of evidence of financial gain by the defendant and the immediate removal of the billboard upon complaint. A permanent injunction was issued to prevent further use of the plaintiff’s image.
Conclusion
The court held that the plaintiff’s right to privacy was infringed by the defendant’s use of his image on a billboard without consent. Consequently, the plaintiff was awarded nominal damages and granted a permanent injunction against further use of his image.