[2023] KEMC 125 (KLR)
The court found that while the police abstract blamed the driver of KBW 251U for the accident, the plaintiff failed to provide documentary evidence confirming the defendants' ownership of the implicated vehicle as at the date of the accident. The absence of a copy of records from the Registrar of Motor Vehicles...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEMC 125 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Patrick Maina Chege; Defendant: Thomas Ngure Mbugua & 4 others
- Court
- Magistrate's Court
- Court Station
- Chief Magistrate's Court (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 5339 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Judgment
- Outcome
- suit dismissed
- Judges
- JP Aduke
- Legal Topics
- Road Traffic Accidents, Negligence, Proof of Ownership, Liability, Damages, Special Damages
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Patrick Maina Chege
Plaintiff
Thomas Ngure Mbugua & 4 others
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendants were liable for the road traffic accident involving the plaintiff's motor vehicle.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff proved ownership of the defendant's vehicle as required by law.
- 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to special damages and costs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that while the police abstract blamed the driver of KBW 251U for the accident, the plaintiff failed to provide documentary evidence confirming the defendants' ownership of the implicated vehicle as at the date of the accident. The absence of a copy of records from the Registrar of Motor Vehicles meant that the plaintiff did not discharge the burden of proof required by section 8 of the Traffic Act. Consequently, the court could not ascertain or apportion liability to the defendants. The suit was therefore dismissed for lack of proof of ownership and, by extension, liability.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed
Orders
- The suit is dismissed for want of proof of ownership and liability.
- No award on costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Chege v Mbugua & 4 others (Civil Suit 5339 of 2015) [2023] KEMC 125 (KLR) (8 May 2023) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEMC 125 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Chief Magistrate's Court (Milimani Law Courts)
Civil Suit 5339 of 2015
JP Aduke, SRM
May 8, 2023
Between
Patrick Maina Chege
Plaintiff
and
Thomas Ngure Mbugua & 4 others
Defendant
Judgment
1. The Plaintiff filed this suit against the defendants following a road traffic accident on 27th June 2015 in Nairobi. In the plaint filed on 9th Sept 2015, the plaintiff avers he was driving motor vehicle registration number KBK 587W when the Defendant and his servant/agent/authorized driver of motor vehicle registration number KBW 251U and KBQ 640C negligently and carelessly drove the said motor vehicles, caused them to ram into KBK 587W causing damage to the plaintiff’s car.
2. The Plaintiff blames the Defendants and their agents/authorized servants for causing the said accident. The Plaintiff further avers that the said accident was solely caused by the negligence of the Defendants and their agents/drivers/servants.
3. The particulars of damage occasioned to the Plaintiff’s car are captured in para 6 of the Plaint while the particulars of alleged negligence are captured in para 6 and 7 of the Plaint. The Plaintiff prays for special damages, costs of the suit and interest at court rates. The Plaint does not state whether or not the plaintiff’s insurer claims against the Defendants under the principle of subrogation of rights.
4. Return of Service on Record shows that the defendants were served with the suit papers. The Defendants entered appearance and filed a defence. The plaintiff called one witness who testified on oath. Pw1 adopted his witness statement on file as his evidence in chief. The Defence Case was closed without calling any witnesses on account of absence of the defence on the date of trial. Parties filed and exchanged written submissions.
5. The issues for determination before this court are liability and quontum:1. LiabilityWith respect to liability, I have seen a copy of the Police Abstract on file which blames the driver of motor vehicle KBW 251U for causing the road accident herein. I have, however,not seen a copy of the copy of Motor Vehicle Copy of Records confirming the identity of the owner of the motor vehicle KBW 251U as the defendants herein as at the date of the road accident. The plaintiff’s lists of documents do not have this information. The provisions of the Traffic Act on proof of ownership/registration of motor vehicle cannot be downplayed in road traffic accident cases. No clarification issued on this issue at trial. In the absence of congruence between the police abstract and a copy of the motor vehicle copy of records showing the registered owner as at the date of the road traffic accident herein, I find the defendants not liable.For the avoidance of doubt, in the absence of any further supporting proof of ownership as at the date of the accident or therebout, I am unable to ascertain and apportion liability. In the circumstances, I find that the defendants are not liable. I have relied on section 8 of the Traffic Act, Cap 403 Laws of Kenya and the reasoning of the court in Wellington Nganga Muthiora vs Akamba Public Road Services & Another[2010] EKLR.2. QuontumHaving found as above on the issue of liability, I find the suit unmerited, and dismiss the same. I make no award on costs.
ADUKE JEAL PRAXADES ATIENOSENIOR RESIDENT MAGISTRATEJUDGEMENT SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 08TH MAY 2023 IN THE ABSENCE/PRESENCE OF THE PARTIES AT 1PM.In the presence of :1. Court Assistant: Benjamin Kombe.2. Counsel for the Plaintiff- ………………………………………………………………………………(Name, Signature, Date)3. For the Defence: ………………………………………………………………………………(Name, Signature, Date)