[2000] KECA 184 (KLR)
The Court found that the applicant had demonstrated an arguable appeal on both liability and quantum of damages, including the issue of contributory negligence and the award of damages not specifically pleaded. The Court further held that, given the substantial sum involved and the risk that the appeal could be...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2000] KECA 184 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kenya Co-operative Creameries Ltd; Respondent: Jacob Mariunus Kiriama
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Miscellaneous Application 183 of 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- Conditional stay of execution granted pending appeal.
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Quantum of Damages, Employer Liability, Contributory Negligence
- 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
Kenya Co-operative Creameries Ltd
Applicant
Jacob Mariunus Kiriama
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a stay of execution pending appeal.
- 2 Whether the applicant has an arguable appeal on liability and quantum of damages.
- 3 Whether failure to plead certain heads of damages affects the award.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that the applicant had demonstrated an arguable appeal on both liability and quantum of damages, including the issue of contributory negligence and the award of damages not specifically pleaded. The Court further held that, given the substantial sum involved and the risk that the appeal could be rendered nugatory if execution proceeded, a conditional stay of execution was warranted. The stay was granted on the condition that the applicant pays KES 1,000,000 to the respondent within 30 days, failing which the application would stand dismissed with costs.
Court Disposition
Conditional stay of execution granted pending appeal.
Orders
- Decree of the superior court stayed on condition that the applicant pays the respondent KES 1,000,000 within 30 days from the date of the ruling.
- If the applicant fails to pay within 30 days, the application stands dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
42 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
CORAM: KWACH, SHAH & BOSIRE, JJ.A.
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI. 183 OF 1999
BETWEEN
KENYA CO-OPERATIVE CREAMERIES LTD....................APPLICANT
AND
JACOB MARIUNUS
KIRIAMA...............................RESPONDENT
RULING OF THE COURT
On 1st day of July, 1999 the superior court (Mbogholi Msagha, J) entered judgment against the defendant, who is the applicant here, in the sum of Shs.9,127,331/00 plus costs and interest. The respondent was the plaintiff in the superior court. He was at the material time an employee of the applicant and was shot by robbers whilst he was carrying out his duties as a salesman. His duties included selling of milk on behalf of the applicant. He had two loaders with him and the driver of the vehicle in question was in the employment of the owner of the vehicle. The cabin of the vehicle has a safe affixed on the floor thereof. The respondent would put the cash in that safe.
Whilst the respondent was seated in the vehicle robbers pretending to be buyers of milk approached him and demanded money at gun-point. He was shot in the neck as a result of which he sustained very serious injuries.
What we have now before us is an application under rule 5(2)(b) of the Rules of this Court for stay of execution pending appeal.
Although the learned judge entered judgment against the applicant in the sum of Shs.9,127,331/= the actual figure should, arithmetically, have been Shs.10,135,331/= as the learned judge has overlooked adding the sum of Shs.1,008,000/= awarded under the heading "loss of earning capacity" to the final total which should stand as follows:
(i)Damages for pain
suffering and
loss of amenities- Shs.2,215,744. 00
(ii)Nursing care - Shs.2,736,000. 00
(iii)Toiletries and
drugs- Shs.2,664,000. 00
(iv)Wheel chair,
orthopaedic bed, toilet and bathroom- Shs.1,366,947. 00
(v)Special Damages- Shs.144,640. 00
(vi)Loss of earning
capacity- Shs.1,008,000. 00 _________________ TOTAL Shs.10,135,331. 00 _________________
Mr. Mbugua who appeared for the applicant, argued that
the applicant will be challenging in the intended appeal, both the liability of the applicant and the quantum of damages awarded against it. On the issue of liability he submitted that the applicant was obliged to provide only reasonable security which does not include armed security. He stated that he will also argue the question of the responent's own negligence particulars whereof are set out in the defence.
The applicant takes issue with all the heads of damages awarded, in particular, nursing care, toiletries and drugs, wheel chair, orthopaedic bed and toilet and bathroom alteration costs. We note that items numbered (ii), (iii), (iv) and (vi) afore-mentioned were not specifically pleaded in the plaint.
We are satisfied that the applicant has an arguable appeal on both limbs, that is to say, on the issue of liability and quantum of damages. Contributory negligence will also, be in issue at the hearing of the appeal and we say no more on these points. There is however a judgment of the superior court in the respondent's favour in a sum exceeding
Shs.10,000,000/=. Considering the evidence in the case and the submissions of counsel before us, we agree that the appeal, if successful, may be rendered nugatory unless a stay is granted, we order that the decree issued by the superior court be stayed on condition that the applicant pays to the respondent a sum of Shs.1,000,000/= within 30 days from today, failing which its application will stand dismissed with costs.
The costs of this application will be costs in the intended
appeal.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 4th day of
February,2000.
R.O. KWACH ................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
A.B. SHAH ................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
S.E.O. BOSIRE ................
JUDGE OF APPEAL I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR.