[2016] KEHC 5503 (KLR)
The court found that the trial magistrate properly considered the medical evidence, including the appellant's intertrochanteric fracture, prolonged hospitalization, and 25% permanent incapacity. The magistrate also considered comparable authorities and submissions. The appellate court held that the award of KES...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 5503 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Ibrahim Kalema Lewa; Respondent: Esteel Co. Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 475 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Workplace Injury, Assessment of Damages, Apportionment of Liability, Permanent Incapacity
- 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
Ibrahim Kalema Lewa
Appellant
Esteel Co. Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial magistrate erred in law and fact in assessing general damages for pain and suffering, resulting in a low award.
- 2 Whether the trial magistrate properly evaluated the evidence, particularly regarding the appellant's permanent incapacity.
- 3 Whether the trial magistrate gave due consideration to the pleadings, evidence, and submissions, including authorities cited by the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial magistrate properly considered the medical evidence, including the appellant's intertrochanteric fracture, prolonged hospitalization, and 25% permanent incapacity. The magistrate also considered comparable authorities and submissions. The appellate court held that the award of KES 300,000 as general damages was commensurate with the injuries suffered and that there was no basis to interfere with the trial court's discretion on quantum. The appeal was therefore dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 475 OF 2012
IBRAHIM KALEMA LEWA.................................................. APPELLANT
- V E R S U S –
ESTEEL CO. LTD............................................................ RESPONDENT
(Being an appeal from the judgment of Honourable Mr. Ole Keiwua, P.M. sitting at Nairobi Milimani Commercial courts in CMCC No. 4896 of 2011 Ibrahim Lewa –vs- Esteel Company Ltd, dated 10th August 2012)
JUDGEMENT
Ibrahim Kalema Lewa, the Appellant herein, filed an action against Esteel Co. Ltd, the Respondent herein claiming for damages arising from the injuries he suffered on 14. 10. 2010 while he was carrying a pipe jerk on his shoulder at the Respondents’ premises as an employee. It is said that when the pipe jerk knocked the wall losing its control and eventually fell on the Appellants left leg at the upper part. Hon. D. Ole Keiwa, learned Principal Magistrate, heard the suit and in the end he awarded the Appellant kshs.300,000/= as general damages. The parties had recorded a consent on apportionment of liability. The Appellant was to shoulder 30% liability while the Respondent shouldered 70% liability. Being aggrieved by the decision on quantum, the Appellant preferred this appeal.
On appeal, the Appellant put forward the following grounds:
The learned magistrate erred in law and in fact in failing to appreciate the relevant principals and case law in assessing damages on pain and suffering and thereby arrived at a very low award on general damages.
The learned magistrate erred in law in failing to properly evaluate the evidence on record, in particular the plaintiff’s witness evidence on permanent in capacity of the appellant and thereby erroneously awarded a low award on general damages.
The learned trial magistrate misdirected himself and failed to give any due and proper consideration to the pleadings and evidence on record and submissions by age of the authority relied upon by counsel for the appellant.
When the appeal came up for hearing, learned counsels recorded a consent order to have the appeal disposed off by written submissions.
At the time of writing this judgment, the Appellant was the only party who had filed his submissions. I have considered the written submissions. It is the submission of the Appellant that the trial magistrate erred by failing to properly evaluate the medical report and thereby erroneously making a low award on general damages. It is argued that the award given was not commensurate with the injuries suffered.
On my part, I have re-evaluated the case, that was before the trial court. The records shows that the medical report reveals that the Appellant sustained intertrochanteric fracture of the left femur and physical and psychological pains. The recorded evidence further shows that the Appellant was admitted in hospital for two months and thereafter he attended outpatient clinics. The doctor who examined the Appellant also opined that he had suffered 25% permanent incapacity. The doctor further noted that the Appellant would not regain normal functional capacity of his limb. The Appellant’s advocates cited Nairobi H.C.C.CC no. 20 of 2002 Jairus Nwanza =vs= James Karanjawhich this court awarded ksh.300,000/= as general damages for near similar injuries. The learned trial magistrate considered the material placed before the court. Though the Appellant had urged the trial court to award him kshs.800,000 as general damages, that request did not attract any favour.
I have on my part reconsidered the submission and the authorities cited and I am convinced that the learned principal magistrate cannot be faulted over his decision on quantum. He gave an award that is commensurate with the injuries the respondent suffered. For this reason I find no merit in the appeal. The same is dismissed with order as to costs.
Dated, Signed and Delivered in open court this 22nd day of April, 2016
J. K. SERGON
JUDGE
In the presence of:
.................................................... for the Appellant
..................................................... for the Respondent