[1999] KECA 147 (KLR)

[1999] KECA 147 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge had properly considered the evidence regarding the appellant's injuries and the resulting disability, noting that the appellant himself admitted he could still use his right hand as before. The appellate court held that there was no misdirection or error of principle in...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1999] KECA 147 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Jayendra Kumar Haria; Respondent: Abdulrasul Hussein
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 220 of 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Decree of the High Court
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Judges
RO Kwach, E Owuor
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, Personal Injury, Appellate Review, Negligence, Quantum of Damages
Source Language
en
Tort Law Civil Procedure Assessment of Damages Personal Injury Appellate Review Negligence Quantum of Damages

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jayendra Kumar Haria

Appellant

Abdulrasul Hussein

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Decree of the High Court

  1. 1 Whether the award of general damages by the trial court was so inordinately low as to warrant interference by the appellate court.
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge misdirected himself in assessing the extent of the plaintiff's disability and the quantum of damages.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge had properly considered the evidence regarding the appellant's injuries and the resulting disability, noting that the appellant himself admitted he could still use his right hand as before. The appellate court held that there was no misdirection or error of principle in the assessment of damages, and the award was not so inordinately low as to justify interference. The appeal was therefore dismissed, and the original award of damages was upheld.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.