[2024] KEHC 3789 (KLR)
The High Court found that the subordinate court's award of Kshs. 600,000.00 as general damages for the respondent's injuries was within the range of awards for similar injuries and was supported by the evidence, including the medical report and the nature of the injuries sustained. The appellants did not file...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 3789 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Coast Raha Limited; Appellant: Wambua Kithome Mulwa; Respondent: Wilson Asnaga Ayanga Alias Wilson Anyanga
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal E226 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- DAS Majanja
- Legal Topics
- Personal Injury, Assessment of Damages, Road Traffic Accidents
- 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
Coast Raha Limited
Appellant
Wambua Kithome Mulwa
Appellant
Wilson Asnaga Ayanga Alias Wilson Anyanga
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the subordinate court erred in its assessment of general damages for personal injuries sustained by the respondent.
- 2 Whether the award of Kshs. 600,000.00 was inordinately high and unsustainable in law.
- 3 Whether the subordinate court properly evaluated the evidence and submissions presented.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the subordinate court's award of Kshs. 600,000.00 as general damages for the respondent's injuries was within the range of awards for similar injuries and was supported by the evidence, including the medical report and the nature of the injuries sustained. The appellants did not file submissions or challenge the respondent's evidence, and the trial court was justified in relying solely on the respondent's submissions. There was no misdirection or application of wrong principles by the subordinate court, nor was the award inordinately high or an erroneous estimate. Consequently, there was no basis for the appellate court to interfere with the award or the finding...
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed with costs.
- The appellants shall pay costs assessed at Kshs. 30,000.00.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
Coast Raha Limited & another v Ayanga alias Wilson Anyanga (Civil Appeal E226 of 2021) [2024] KEHC 3789 (KLR) (5 April 2024) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 3789 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Mombasa
Civil Appeal E226 of 2021
DAS Majanja, J
April 5, 2024
Between
Coast Raha Limited
1st Appellant
Wambua Kithome Mulwa
2nd Appellant
and
Wilson Asnaga Ayanga Alias Wilson Anyanga
Respondent
(Being an appeal from the Judgment and Decree of Hon. E. Muchoki, RM dated 9th December 2020 at the Magistrates Court at Mombasa in Civil Case No. 2561 of 2018)
Judgment
1. The Appellants are dissatisfied with the judgment of the Subordinate Court dated 09. 12. 2020 that awarded the Respondent Kshs. 600,000. 00 as general damages for injuries he sustained as a result of an accident that occurred on 27. 10. 2018 at Toyo roundabout area along the Nairobi-Mombasa highway. The Respondent was a passenger in the 1st Appellant’s motor vehicle registration number KCK *G being driven by the 2nd Appellant. The Subordinate Court found the Appellants 100% liable for the accident as the Respondent’s evidence that the accident was caused by the negligence of the Appellants was unchallenged.
2. Through their memorandum of appeal dated 26. 11. 2021, the Appellants aver the Subordinate Court erred by proceeding on wrong principles when assessing the damages to be awarded to the Respondent. That it misdirected itself by awarding a sum that was inordinately high and excessive in the circumstances and that it failed to adequately evaluate the evidence and exhibits and thereby arrived at a decision unsustainable in law. The Appellants therefore urge the court to allow their appeal, set aside the Subordinate Court’s judgment and that the award be re-assessed.
3. In determining this appeal, the court is guided by the principle that it is its duty to re-evaluate the evidence independently and reach its own conclusion as to whether to uphold the judgment. In doing so, the court must make an allowance for the fact that it neither heard nor saw the witnesses testify (see Selle v Associated Motor Boat Co. Ltd (1968) EA 123). On the quantum awarded by a subordinate court, this court can only disturb the awarded sum if it is shown that the court took into account an irrelevant factor, or left out of account a relevant one, or the amount is inordinately low or inordinately high that it was a wholly erroneous estimate of the damages (see Kemfro Africa Ltd t/a Meru Express Services v Lubia & Another [1982-88] 1 KAR 777). The court should also make fair and consistent awards in line with the principle that similar injuries must attract similar awards (see Maore v Geoffrey Mwenda [2004]eKLR).
4. It was not disputed that the Respondent sustained a fracture of the left humerus arm bone (lower 1/3rd) and had a cut wound on the right hand. As per the medical report dated 01. 11. 2018 produced by Dr. Ajoni Adede, the doctor assessed his permanent partial liability at 8%, that healing will take place with stiffness of the left elbow and that the fracture sites will remain a weak point for life even if the bones unite. That the fracture site is a focus for accelerated bone and joint wear and tear. I note that whereas the Respondent filed written submissions in support of its position for damages, the Appellants did not file the same despite the subordinate court granting them various opportunities to do so. The Subordinate Court could therefore not be faulted for only considering the Respondent’s submissions in arriving at the sum to be awarded.
5. Even though the Respondent sought for a sum of Kshs. 1,500,000. 00, the Subordinate Court held that a sum of Kshs. 600,000. 00 would be appropriate. I find that this sum is within the range of awards issued for persons who have sustained “a fracture of the left proximal 1/3 humerus” (see Agility Logistics Limited v John Wambua Musau & another Voi HCCA No. 27 of 2015 [2017] eKLR).
6. I do not find any reason to disturb the award given by the Subordinate Court. The Appeal is dismissed with costs. The Appellant shall pay costs assessed at Kshs. 30,000. 00.
SIGNED AT NAIROBID. S. MAJANJAJUDGEDATED AND DELIVERED AT MOMBASA THIS 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2024. OLGA SEWEJUDGE