[2001] KEHC 690 (KLR)
The court found that the plaint sufficiently pleaded the defamatory words by quoting them verbatim and providing a translation. The words uttered by the appellant were indeed defamatory, as they imputed criminal conduct to the respondent. However, since no special damages were pleaded or proved, the only recoverable...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2001] KEHC 690 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Newman Njema Mgele; Respondent: Anastacia Nzighe Mwakuja
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 12 of ??
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed on liability; allowed in part on quantum of damages.
- Legal Topics
- Defamation, Damages Assessment, Pleading Requirements
- 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
Newman Njema Mgele
Appellant
Anastacia Nzighe Mwakuja
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the words uttered by the appellant were defamatory of the respondent.
- 2 Whether the plaint sufficiently pleaded the defamatory words.
- 3 Whether special damages were required to be pleaded in a defamation claim where only solatium is sought.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaint sufficiently pleaded the defamatory words by quoting them verbatim and providing a translation. The words uttered by the appellant were indeed defamatory, as they imputed criminal conduct to the respondent. However, since no special damages were pleaded or proved, the only recoverable damages were for solatium, i.e., compensation for injured feelings. The trial court's award of Kshs. 30,000 was deemed excessive in the circumstances, and the appellate court exercised its discretion to reduce the award to Kshs. 8,000 as appropriate solatium. The appeal was dismissed on liability but allowed in part on the quantum of damages.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed on liability; allowed in part on quantum of damages.
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed except as to damages.
- The award of Kshs. 30,000 is set aside and substituted with an award of Kshs. 8,000 as solatium.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
9 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12 OF 2000
NEWMAN NJEMA MGELE …………………………….. APPELLANT =VERSUS= ANASTACIA NZIGHE MWAKUJA ……………..…… RESPONDENT
JUDGEMENT
Appellant was alleged liable in damages for defaming the Respondent. It was alleged that he called the Respondent a witch who had killed people. There was evidence that he uttered these words and that they were defamatory of in that by uttering those words the Appellant meant to convey that the Respondent was a killer.
The 12 grounds of appeal preferred by the appellant were not in most part really relevant except ground 2 and 11 where he say, there was no cause of action and that the defamatory words was not pleaded. The latter complains is not true since as a matter of fair the plains quoted the offending words verbatim and effected their translation thereof.
The other point to ask is whether the words were defamatory and if so if they were actionable since plaintiff has not claimed any special damages. Looking at the plaint it is clear there was no special damage pleaded. My understanding of the law is that where plea of special damage is not pleaded or alleged in a plaint for defamation the damages are only a solarium for injured feelings.
Having looked at the pleading and heard the appellant and Mr. Mulumzya for the Respondent, I dismiss the appeal except on damages where I think Kshs. 30,000/- was not properly awarded. What is required here was just a solarium and so I would interfere with the discretion of Trial Court and reduce the damages to Kshs. 8,000/- being solarium payment only.
Delivered in open court this 23rd July, 2001
A. I. HAYANGA JUDGE