[2013] KEHC 117 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 117 (KLR)

The court found that the trial magistrate had properly considered the medical reports presented and could not be faulted for her assessment. Although the magistrate did not explicitly consider all authorities supplied, the court held that the award of Kshs.400,000 was fair and reasonable given the passage of time...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 117 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Ismael Kaguongo; Respondent: Baru Kabiru
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 30 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Road Traffic Accidents, Assessment of Damages, Contributory Negligence
Source Language
en
Tort Law Civil Procedure Road Traffic Accidents Assessment of Damages Contributory Negligence

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ismael Kaguongo

Appellant

Baru Kabiru

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the award of Kshs.400,000 in general damages was excessive for the injuries suffered by the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the trial magistrate failed to consider medical evidence and comparable authorities in making the award.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the trial magistrate had properly considered the medical reports presented and could not be faulted for her assessment. Although the magistrate did not explicitly consider all authorities supplied, the court held that the award of Kshs.400,000 was fair and reasonable given the passage of time and inflation since the cited cases. The appellant's authorities were based on much older decisions, while the respondent's authority involved more serious injuries. The court concluded that the award was within the acceptable range for the injuries suffered and should not be disturbed. Consequently, the appeal lacked merit and was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.