[2023] KEHC 18357 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 18357 (KLR)

The trial court's award of Kshs 200,000 in general damages was inordinately low given the nature and severity of the appellant's injuries, specifically a fracture of the right humerus with radial nerve damage resulting in wrist drop and ongoing weakness. The trial magistrate failed to consider the impact of inflation on the comparability of previous awards, relying on authorities that were over a decade old. The appellate court found that the authorities cited by the appellant, while involving more severe injuries, nonetheless indicated that the award should be higher, especially when considering inflation and recent comparable cases. Consequently, the High Court exercised its discretion...

Citation
[2023] KEHC 18357 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Jane Kirigo Gitathi; Respondent: Charles Maina Kinyua; Respondent: Peter Gatura
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Murang'a
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
31 May 2023
Case Number
Civil Appeal 32 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; award of general damages enhanced.
Judges
SC Chirchir
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, Personal Injury, Road Traffic Accidents, Appellate Review, Quantification of General Damages
Source Language
English
Tort Law Civil Procedure Assessment of Damages Personal Injury Road Traffic Accidents Appellate Review Quantification of General Damages

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jane Kirigo Gitathi

Appellant

Charles Maina Kinyua

Respondent

Peter Gatura

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court's award of general damages was inordinately low in view of the injuries sustained by the appellant.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court failed to consider relevant factors such as inflation and relied on outdated authorities in assessing damages.
  3. 3 Whether the appellate court should interfere with the trial court's discretion in the assessment of damages.

Ratio Decidendi

The trial court's award of Kshs 200,000 in general damages was inordinately low given the nature and severity of the appellant's injuries, specifically a fracture of the right humerus with radial nerve damage resulting in wrist drop and ongoing weakness. The trial magistrate failed to consider the impact of inflation on the comparability of previous awards, relying on authorities that were over a decade old. The appellate court found that the authorities cited by the appellant, while involving more severe injuries, nonetheless indicated that the award should be higher, especially when considering inflation and recent comparable cases. Consequently, the High Court exercised its discretion...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; award of general damages enhanced.

Orders

  • The lower court's award of Kshs 200,000 in general damages is set aside and substituted with Kshs 600,000, subject to the agreed apportionment of 85%/15%.
  • Judgment entered in favour of the appellant for general damages of Kshs 600,000 and special damages of Kshs 270,635, totaling Kshs 870,635.