Get help now

iwanuka v. Bakilana

  • Pages 2
  • Words 429
  • Views 196
  • dovnload



  • Pages 2
  • Words 429
  • Views 196
  • Academic anxiety?

    Get original paper in 3 hours and nail the task

    Get your paper price

    124 experts online

    According to the book, the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress can be defined as an extreme and outrageous act, intentionally committed, that results in severe emotional distress to another. To be actionable (capable of serving as the ground for a lawsuit), the conduct must be so extreme and outrageous that it exceeds the bounds of decency accepted by society. Business Law Today, 10th Edition, pg. 99.

    In the case of Kiwanuka v. Bakilana, Bakilana did cause emotional distress to Ms. Kiwanuka by threatening her with deportation, making her work twenty-four hours a day, grabbing her by the shirt collar, and taking her passport and papers which are extreme and outrageous acts and were intentionally committed.

    According to the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act. 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 1589; 1590, Bakilana violated this act when she made Kiwanuka work twenty-four hours a day, yelled, screamed and threated Kiwanuka with deportation, which was enough to establish “condition of servitude”.

    The Thirteenth Amendment states that it prohibits slavery and involuntary servitude. See U.S. Constitution of the United States. In this case Kiwanuka had to work twenty-four hours a day and was not allowed to leave the house. She was kept isolated from other people therefore causing more emotional distress by not having contact with others. The FBI recorded Bakilana threatening Kiwanuka with deportation and yelling at her. This evidence helped Kiwanuka’s case and the judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff.

    I agree with Judge Lamberth on most of this case. He did rule for the plaintiff on emotional distress and this outrageous conduct of Ms. Bakilana. He granted her restitution of her wages. If I were the judge I would have awarded her more money and given Bakilana more than 2 years’ probation.

    I don’t agree with the part that Mr. Rwehumbiza was cleared of liability. I believe he played a role in this case by not protecting the plaintiff from his wife’s extreme behavior. I believe he was guilty for not paying her decent wages and he should not have allowed his wife to take her papers and passport. He was the employer along with his wife and should be held responsible for the welfare of the plaintiff. He forced Ms. Kiwanuka into involuntary servitude and forced labor by threatening her of deportation. But according to, Hughes v. Moore, 214 Va. 27. 197 S.E.2d 214 (1973) “where conduct is merely negligent, not willful, wanton, or vindictive, and physical impact is lacking, there can be no recovery for emotional disturbance alone.” Mr. Rwehumbiza was negligent and dismissed from the case.

    This essay was written by a fellow student. You may use it as a guide or sample for writing your own paper, but remember to cite it correctly. Don’t submit it as your own as it will be considered plagiarism.

    Need a custom essay sample written specially to meet your requirements?

    Choose skilled expert on your subject and get original paper with free plagiarism report

    Order custom paper Without paying upfront

    iwanuka v. Bakilana. (2016, Nov 05). Retrieved from

    Hi, my name is Amy 👋

    In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

    Get help with your paper
    We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy