Automated Summary
Key Facts
Rengo Joshua Wafula (respondent) claimed injuries from a 2015 vehicle collision involving Mombasa Maize Millers (KSM) Ltd's vehicle driven by Julius Kipyegon (appellants). The lower court awarded Kshs. 600,000/- general damages at a 70:30 liability ratio. Appellants challenged the quantum, arguing the amount was inordinately high, and proposed Kshs. 300,000/- to 400,000/-. The respondent cited severe injuries and requested Kshs. 800,000/-. The appellate court reduced the damages to Kshs. 400,000/-, finding the original award excessive compared to similar cases. Key injuries included a mandible fracture, 6 cm facial scar, chest pain, and jaw/teeth damage. The judgment was delivered on 15 June 2017.
Issues
- The court considered whether the magistrate misdirected himself by superficially treating evidence and reached a wrong conclusion on the quantum of damages awarded.
- The court evaluated whether the awarded damages of Kshs. 600,000/- were inordinately high compared to the respondent's injuries and cited precedents, ultimately reducing the amount to Kshs. 400,000/-.
Holdings
- The court found that the original award of Kshs. 600,000/- for general damages was inordinately high and reduced it to Kshs. 400,000/-.
- Special damages were retained at Kshs. 37,118/- and the award is subject to the agreed 70:30% liability ratio.
Remedies
- The general damages award of Kshs. 600,000/- was reduced to Kshs. 400,000/- on appeal. This reduction reflects the court's determination that the original amount was inordinately high, with the new figure representing an appropriate compensation level for the respondent's injuries under a 70:30 liability ratio.
- The court awarded the appellants the costs of the appeal. This decision followed the reduction of general damages and the retention of special damages at the original trial court's determination.
- Special damages were retained at Kshs. 37,118/- as determined by the lower court. The appellate court found no basis to interfere with this specific monetary award for quantifiable losses.
Monetary Damages
437118.00
Legal Principles
The appellate court will not disturb a damages award unless it is inordinately high or low as to represent an entirely erroneous estimate, or the trial judge proceeded on wrong principles or misapprehended the evidence in a material respect.
Precedent Name
- Bashir Ahmed Butt v Uwais Ahmed Khan
- Selle v Associated Motor Boat Co. Ltd
- Caleb Onyango Uyogo v P A
- Isaac Waweru Mundia V Kiilu Kakie Ndeti T/A Wikwatyo Services
- Joseph Mwanza v Eldoret Express
- Hassan Mohammed Adan v Tracom Ltd and Another
Cited Statute
Civil Procedure Act
Judge Name
T. W. Cherere
Passage Text
- I am of the view that the sum of Kshs. 600,000/- was inordinately high to warrant interference with the award. I therefore reduce the sum for general damages to Kshs. 400,000/-.
- The most serious injury was the fracture on the mandible and the injury to the cheek which healed with a residual 6 cm scar.
- the principles to be observed by this appellate court in deciding whether it is justified in disturbing the quantum of damages awarded by a trial judge are that it must be satisfied that either the judge in assessing the damages took into account an irrelevant factor, or left out of account a relevant one or that short of this, he amount is so inordinately high that it must be a wholly erroneous estimate of the damages