Court orders security firm to pay sh115m over bar shooting
The court also awarded Bukenya interest at 10% per annum on the general damages from the date of judgment until payment in full, and a similar interest rate on the special damages from the date the suit was filed until payment in full. The judge further ordered Hash Security to meet the costs of the suit.
The case arose from an incident on the night of April 30, 2022, when Bukenya was shot in the back of both thighs during an encounter with Enock Muyinza Busuulwa, an armed security guard deployed by Hash Security at the bar.
KAMPALA - The High Court in Kampala has ordered Hash Security Limited to pay sh115m to a man who was shot twice by its security guard at Devanna Bar and Lounge in Bulenga, Wakiso district.
Justice Bonny Isaac Teko awarded Zein Bukenya sh100m in general damages and sh15,009,500 in special damages after finding the security firm's employee negligent in handling and discharging a loaded firearm.
The court also awarded Bukenya interest at 10% per annum on the general damages from the date of judgment until payment in full, and a similar interest rate on the special damages from the date the suit was filed until payment in full.
The judge further ordered Hash Security to meet the costs of the suit.
The case arose from an incident on the night of April 30, 2022, when Bukenya was shot in the back of both thighs during an encounter with Enock Muyinza Busuulwa, an armed security guard deployed by Hash Security at the bar.
The court heard that Bukenya had accumulated a bar bill of sh116,000 before an altercation arose between him and the security guard.
Bukenya told court that after explaining that his phone battery had died and that he would return to pay by mobile money, he was allowed to leave with his three companions.
Hash Security, however, gave a different account, claiming that Bukenya had refused to pay, became aggressive and attempted to leave the premises.
According to the security firm, Bukenya tried to grab Muyinza's loaded firearm, resulting in a struggle during which he pulled the trigger and shot himself in both thighs.
The court rejected the security firm's version of events, relying on the medical evidence and testimony presented during the trial.
Justice Teko noted that the bullets entered the posterior aspect of Bukenya's thighs and exited through the front, which he found difficult to reconcile with the defence's account that Bukenya had wrested control of the firearm and accidentally shot himself during a face-to-face struggle.
“I therefore prefer the Plaintiff’s account on the material issue of the manner in which the shooting occurred and find that the Plaintiff did not struggle with DW1 or attempt to seize the firearm,” the judge ruled.
The court found that Muyinza owed Bukenya a duty of care because he was an armed security guard entrusted with a loaded firearm while working in a commercial environment frequented by members of the public.
Justice Teko said the guard breached that duty by engaging Bukenya in a physical confrontation while carrying a loaded firearm instead of maintaining control of the weapon and seeking assistance.
The court also rejected the company's arguments that Bukenya had voluntarily assumed the risk, acted illegally or contributed to his injuries.
Justice Teko said there was no evidence that Bukenya had voluntarily accepted the risk of being shot and that merely knowing that the security guard was armed did not amount to consent to negligent discharge of a firearm.
The judge also rejected the argument that Bukenya's alleged failure to pay the bar bill justified dismissal of his claim.
“The Plaintiff’s cause of action is not founded upon the alleged non-payment of the bar bill. He seeks compensation for personal injuries caused by the negligent discharge of a firearm by the Defendant’s employee,” Justice Teko said.
The court noted that Bukenya sustained two gunshot wounds to the back of both thighs and underwent major surgery at Mulago National Referral Hospital.
However, the judge said there was no medical evidence establishing permanent disability, permanent shortening of the limbs, permanent deformity or sexual or reproductive impairment.
The court therefore awarded sh100m in general damages instead of the sh250m sought by Bukenya.
For special damages, the court awarded sh15,009,500, saying that was the amount strictly proved through documents admitted in evidence.
The court declined to award some of the claimed expenses because several receipts were either not admitted, were illegible, were dated before the shooting or did not establish that Bukenya was the purchaser.