Automated Summary
Key Facts
Joseph Muiruri Ndaya (Respondent) was injured by Anthony Macharia Gikara's (Appellant) vehicle while repairing it. The Appellant denied liability, but the trial court found him 80% responsible with contributory negligence at 20%. The Appellant appealed, contesting liability and the Kshs. 800,000 general damages award. The High Court upheld the trial court's findings, dismissed the appeal, and confirmed the damages as reasonable.
Issues
- The court addressed whether the Appellant, Anthony Macharia Gikara, was liable for the injuries sustained by the Respondent, Joseph Muiruri Ndaya. The Respondent alleged the Appellant's driver drove the vehicle while he was underneath it, causing the accident. The Appellant denied liability, claiming the vehicle reversed on its own. The trial court found the Appellant largely responsible, and the appellate court affirmed this finding, concluding the Appellant's uncorroborated claim of the vehicle reversing independently was legally insufficient.
- The court assessed the quantum of damages awarded to the Respondent. The trial court granted Kshs. 800,000 in general damages and Kshs. 248,982 in special damages. The Appellant argued for a reduction to Kshs. 600,000 in general damages. The appellate court upheld the trial court's assessment, finding the award reasonable based on medical evidence and legal precedents, and dismissed the appeal on this issue.
Holdings
- The court upheld the Kshs. 800,000 general damages award, concluding it was reasonable based on medical evidence and precedents. The Appellant's request to reduce the award to Kshs. 600,000 was rejected as not meeting the threshold for appellate intervention.
- The court affirmed the trial court's determination of liability, finding no basis to interfere with the conclusion that the Appellant was largely to blame for the accident. The Appellant's claim that the vehicle reversed on its own was dismissed as unsubstantiated hearsay.
Remedies
The Court dismissed the appeal with costs, upholding the original award of Kshs. 800,000 in general damages and Kshs. 248,982 in special damages.
Monetary Damages
1048982.00
Legal Principles
- The Court of Appeal in Kemfro Africa Ltd v A. M. Lubia & Another (1988)1 KAR 727 established that an appellate court may disturb the quantum of damages awarded by a trial judge only if the judge considered an irrelevant factor, omitted a relevant one, or the amount is so inordinately low or high that it must be a wholly erroneous estimate of the damage.
- The court held that the Appellant's uncorroborated assertion that the vehicle reversed on its own motion amounted to hearsay and was inadmissible as evidence since no witness at the scene testified to this version of events.
Precedent Name
- Selle & Another vs. Associated Motor Boat Co. Ltd. & Others
- Kemfro Africa Ltd v A. M. Lubia & Another
- Abdul Hammed Saif vs. Ali Mohamed Sholan
- Denshire Muteti Wambua -vs- Kenya Power & Lighting Co. Ltd
- Arrow Car Limited -vs- Bimomo & 2 others
Judge Name
AC Mrima
Passage Text
- the trial Court handled the aspect of liability properly and no basis has been laid to interfere with such finding.
- the award is reasonable in the circumstances.
- The principles to be observed by an appellate court in deciding whether it is justified in disturbing the quantum of damages awarded by a trial Judge were held... 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, the amount is so inordinately low or so inordinately high that it must be a wholly erroneous estimate of the damage.