[2023] KEMC 69 (KLR)
The court found that liability for the accident was settled by default judgment due to the defendants' failure to appear. On the issue of quantum, the court held that special damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved by actual receipts or evidence of payment. The plaintiff only produced a receipt for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEMC 69 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: John Kahara Mungai; Defendant: Kenya Power and Lighting Company; Defendant: David Muiruri Mwangi
- Court
- Magistrate's Court
- Court Station
- Chief Magistrate's Court (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit E865 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Judgment After Default and Formal Proof
- Outcome
- Judgment for the plaintiff for proved special damages, costs, and interest.
- Judges
- JP Aduke
- Legal Topics
- Negligence, Road Traffic Accident, Special Damages, Proof of Special Damages
- 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
John Kahara Mungai
Plaintiff
Kenya Power and Lighting Company
Defendant
David Muiruri Mwangi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment After Default and Formal Proof
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendants were liable for the road traffic accident and resulting damage to the plaintiff's vehicle.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff proved special damages as required by law.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that liability for the accident was settled by default judgment due to the defendants' failure to appear. On the issue of quantum, the court held that special damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved by actual receipts or evidence of payment. The plaintiff only produced a receipt for KES 550 for a motor vehicle search, while other claimed amounts were supported by invoices and estimates, which do not meet the legal threshold for proof of special damages. Consequently, the court awarded only the amount that was both pleaded and proved by receipt, dismissing the rest of the special damages claim. The plaintiff was also awarded costs of the suit and interest...
Court Disposition
Judgment for the plaintiff for proved special damages, costs, and interest.
Orders
- Plaintiff awarded special damages of KES 550.
- Plaintiff awarded costs of the suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
Mungai v Kenya Power and Lighting Company & another (Civil Suit E865 of 2022) [2023] KEMC 69 (KLR) (13 March 2023) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEMC 69 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Chief Magistrate's Court (Milimani Law Courts)
Civil Suit E865 of 2022
JP Aduke, SRM
March 13, 2023
Between
John Kahara Mungai
Plaintiff
and
Kenya Power and Lighting Company
1st Defendant
David Muiruri Mwangi
2nd Defendant
Judgment
1. The Plaintiff filed this suit against the defendants following a road traffic accident on 28th March 2020 in Nairobi. In the plaint dated 21st February 2022, the plaintiff avers his wife was driving motor vehicle registration number KCS XXXX when the Defendant and his servant/agent/authorized driver of motor vehicle registration number KCQ XXXC negligently and carelessly drove the said motor vehicle, caused it to lose control and hit KCS XXXX causing damage to the plaintiff’s car.
2. The Plaintiff blames the Defendants and their agents/authorized servants for causing the said accident. The Plaintiff further avers that the said accident was solely caused by the negligence of the Defendants.
3. The particulars of damages occasioned to the Plaintiff’s car are captured in para 7 of the Plaint while the particulars of alleged negligence are captured in para 5 of the Plaint. The Plaintiff prays for special damages, costs of the suit and interest at court rates.
4. Return of Service on Record shows that the defendants were served with the suit papers. The defendant failed to enter appearance. As a result, judgment in default was entered on 14th July 2022. The matter proceeded to formal proof hearing. At the hearing thereof, the plaintiff called three witnesses who testified and produced exhibits in support of the claim. Plaintiff filed written submissions on quantum. The issue for determination before this court is quantum, seeing as liability is settled by the default judgement on record.
Quontum 5. The Plaintiff prays Special Damages, Costs of the Suit and any other relief. With respect to Special Damages, the Plaint prays for ksh 224 752. 00/- as captured in para 10 of the Plaint. I have seen assessment and inspection reports on record, invoices. I have, however, not seen any copies of pay-out cheques in respect of the said invoices or cost estimates. I have seen a print out of a receipt for ksh 550/- in respect of Motor Vehicle Search. It is settled principle that special damages must be pleaded and proved (see John Kibicho v Emmanuel P Mkoitiko [2017] eKLR) . I find that ksh 550/- has been pleaded and proved and award the same. In Christine Mwigina Akonya v Samuel Kairu Chege [2017] eKLR the court stated thus:“Our decisional law is quite clear now that one consequence of this general principle is that a party claiming special damages must demonstrate that they actually made the payments or suffered the specific injury before the compensation will be granted…….the courts have insisted that a party must present actual receipts of payments made to substantiate loss or economic injury. It is not enough for a party to provide profoma invoices sent to the party by a third party. Our courts have held that an invoice is not proof of payment and that only a receipt meets the test…”
6. I have relied on the above reasoning of the court in arriving at my findings in the present case.
7. I have considered all the submissions on record and the authorities annexed thereto. I have also considered all the exhibits on record. In particular, I have also relied on the reasoning of the court in Akamba Public Road Services v Abdikadir Adan Galgalo [2016] eKLR and African Line Transport Company v Swaleh Kitsao & Sylvester Keitany, Civil Appeal no 6 of 2017 where the court outlined the principles to be applied in awarding special damages under the doctrine of subrogation.
8. In conclusion, I enter judgement in favour of the plaintiff as follows:1. Special damages ksh 550/-2. Costs of the suit.3. Interest on 2 above at court rates.
9. The Plaintiff shall have costs in this suit and interest at court rates as outlined above from the date of this judgement until payment in full.
ADUKE JEAL PRAXADES ATIENOSENIOR RESIDENT MAGISTRATEJUDGEMENT SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 13TH MARCH 2023 IN THE ABSENCE OF THE PARTIES.In the presence of :Court Assistant: Benjamin Kombe.Counsel for the Plaintiff- …………………….…………………………………………………………..(Name, Signature, Date)For the Defence: ……………………………………………….………………………………..(Name, Signature, Date)