[2020] KEHC 3825 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 3825 (KLR)

The court found that the judgment delivered on 12th July, 2018 contained an arithmetical error in the computation of loss of dependency, as the one third fraction directed by the court was omitted from the calculation. This constituted an error apparent on the face of the record, justifying review and correction...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 3825 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Mango Chimaren; Appellant: William Gatei Muiruri; Respondent: Efreli Ambiyo; Respondent: Ezekia Gwendo (Suing as the administrator of the Estate of Wellington Musembi (Deceased))
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 225 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
A Mbogholi-Msagha
Legal Topics
Review of Judgment, Arithmetical Errors, Loss of Dependency, Contributory Negligence
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Tort Law Review of Judgment Arithmetical Errors Loss of Dependency 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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mango Chimaren

Appellant

William Gatei Muiruri

Appellant

Efreli Ambiyo

Respondent

Ezekia Gwendo (Suing as the administrator of the Estate of Wellington Musembi (Deceased))

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment

  1. 1 Whether there was an error apparent on the face of the record in the computation of loss of dependency in the judgment delivered on 12th July, 2018.
  2. 2 Whether the court should review its judgment to correct the computation error under Section 80 and Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the judgment delivered on 12th July, 2018 contained an arithmetical error in the computation of loss of dependency, as the one third fraction directed by the court was omitted from the calculation. This constituted an error apparent on the face of the record, justifying review and correction under Section 80 and Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act. The court recalculated the loss of dependency as 5,195 x 12 x 17 x 1/3, less 20% contributory negligence, resulting in a final award of Kshs. 282,608. The application for review was allowed, and the judgment was corrected accordingly.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The judgment is reviewed to correct the computation of loss of dependency as 5,195 x 12 x 17 x 1/3, less 20% contributory negligence, resulting in Kshs. 282,608.
  • No order as to costs.