[2020] KEHC 8500 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant, having appealed against the entire judgment of the trial court—including the issue of costs—was entitled to costs for both the appeal and the trial court. The appellate judgment did not expressly limit the award of costs to the appeal only. Therefore, the principle that costs...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 8500 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Joseph M. Mafunga; Respondent: Chabhadiya Enterprises Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Bungoma
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 101 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Review/interpretation of Judgment
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Judges
- SN Riechi
- Legal Topics
- Costs Award, Review of Judgment, Workplace Injury, Appeals Process
- 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
Joseph M. Mafunga
Appellant
Chabhadiya Enterprises Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Review/interpretation of Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the costs awarded by the appellate court covered both the trial court and the appeal court.
- 2 Whether the application for review or interpretation of the judgment on costs had merit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant, having appealed against the entire judgment of the trial court—including the issue of costs—was entitled to costs for both the appeal and the trial court. The appellate judgment did not expressly limit the award of costs to the appeal only. Therefore, the principle that costs follow the event applied, and the costs awarded covered both the trial and appellate proceedings. The application seeking review or interpretation to limit the costs to the appeal alone was without merit and was dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application dated 20/5/2019 is dismissed with costs to the appellant.
- The costs awarded by the appellate court include both the trial court and appeal court costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
40 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT BUNGOMA
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 101 OF 2014
JOSEPH M. MAFUNGA.......................................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
CHABADIYA ENTERPRISES LTD...................................................DEFENDANT
(An Appeal from Ruling in original Bungoma CM Civil Suit 9 of 2014
delivered on 16/12/2014 By Hon. L.A. OLEL (RM)
R U L I N G
This is an application dated 20/5/2019 by the CHABHADIYA ENTERPRISES LTD the Respondent in the appeal seeking orders:
That the Judgment and orders of Hon. Lady Justice Abida Aroni made on 12/10/2012 be reviewed, varied, or interpreted”.
The brief history of this matter is that Joseph Mulati Mafunga filed a suit in Bungoma Chief Magistrate’s Court Civil Case 9/2014 seeking general damages for pain and suffering from injuries sustained in the Respondents workplace where he was employed as a worker. The trial Court Hon. Olel Resident Magistrate dismissed the said on 16/12/2014 with an order that each party to bear their own costs.
Dissatisfied with the dismissal of the suit, then Joseph the applicant appealed to the High Court in Bungoma High Court Civil Appeal 101/2014 and by Judgment delivered by Aroni Judge on 12/12/2017 in Paragraph 15 of the Judgment stated:
“The upshot is that the appeal succeeds on the following terms;
1. General damages Kshs.80,000/-
2. Specials Kshs.5,300/-
Kshs.85,300/-
Less 30% contribution Kshs.25,590/-
Total payable Kshs.59,710/=
Costs to the Appellant
DatedandDeliveredatBungomathis12thday ofOctober,2017”.
The respondent submits that the Aroni Judge awarded costs, which only related to the costs on appeal. He submits that the appellant’s prayer for costs of the trial Court is erroneous and that this Court should interpret Hon. Justice Aroni’s decision on costs as to whether in relation to the costs of appeal only or on both appeal and lower Court.
Mr. Bw’Onchiri for Respondent/Appellant submits that costs follow the event and as the appellant was awarded costs the costs awarded would cover both the trial Court and appeal Court.
There is no doubt that the appellant filed an appeal in the High Court against the Judgment and decree of the trial Court. The extracted decree annexed to the Record of appeal states;
“DECREE
CLAIM
(a) General damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenities.
(b) Loss of actual earnings to the date of trial and loss of future earning capacity.
(c) Special damages of Kshs 8,300/=.
(d) Costs and interest.
(e) Any other further relief this Honorable Court deems just to grant.
This matter coming up for judgment on the 16th day of December 2014 before Hon. L. OLEL in the presence of Mr. Masinde for the defendant.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AN DDECREED AS FOLLOWS:
i. That this suit hereby dismissed with each party to bear their own costs.”
My understanding is that the appellant having been dissatisfied with the judgment and decree he appealed against the whole Judgment which included the issue of costs. The Honourable Judge awarded costs to the appellant. As costs follow the event, the award of costs in the appeal would also include costs in the lower Court. I therefore find that the applicant was allowed costs for both appeal and the Court Chief Magistrate’s Civil Case 9/2014.
I therefore find no merit in the application which is hereby dismissed with costs.
Dated at Bungoma this 6th day of February, 2020.
S. N. RIECHI
JUDGE