[2022] KEHC 17148 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 17148 (KLR)

The court found that the inclusion of a '2nd plaintiff' in the judgment was an error, as there was no such party in the proceedings from the trial court onwards. This erroneous reference convoluted the judgment and required rectification. The court exercised its jurisdiction under section 99 of the Civil Procedure...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 17148 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Ruth Ingasiani Amwai; Respondent: Western Express Coach
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 91 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Rectification of Judgment
Outcome
application for rectification allowed; judgment rectified and clarified
Judges
PJO Otieno
Legal Topics
Rectification of Judgment, Assessment of Damages, Loss of Dependency, Clerical Error Correction
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Tort Law Rectification of Judgment Assessment of Damages Loss of Dependency Clerical Error Correction

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ruth Ingasiani Amwai

Appellant

Western Express Coach

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Rectification of Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the judgment erroneously included a non-party (2nd plaintiff) in the award of damages.
  2. 2 Whether the court should rectify the judgment to clarify the actual sum awarded for loss of dependency.
  3. 3 Whether the court has jurisdiction to correct clerical and arithmetic mistakes under section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the inclusion of a '2nd plaintiff' in the judgment was an error, as there was no such party in the proceedings from the trial court onwards. This erroneous reference convoluted the judgment and required rectification. The court exercised its jurisdiction under section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act to expunge all references to the 2nd plaintiff and substitute them with 'appellant.' The court clarified that the correct calculation for loss of dependency was Kshs 10,000 x 35 x 12 x 0.5, totaling Kshs 2,280,000, and after deducting 15% for contributory negligence, the net sum due to the appellant was Kshs 2,193,000. The judgment was thus rectified to reflect the correct...

Court Disposition

application for rectification allowed; judgment rectified and clarified

Orders

  • All references to '2nd plaintiff' in the judgment are expunged and substituted with 'appellant'.
  • The appellant is entitled to Kshs 2,193,000 plus costs and interest from March 3, 2022 until payment in full.