[2018] KEHC 5792 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 5792 (KLR)

The High Court found that the trial court erred in its assessment of general damages by failing to consider relevant and recent medical evidence, particularly the report of Dr. Udayan, which showed the appellant's pain and disability persisted for over 14 months post-accident. The trial court also relied on outdated...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEHC 5792 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Silvester Musyoka Josphat; Respondent: Hadija Sawe Chlangaty Alias Pasters Khadija
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 152 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal_allowed_in_part
Judges
CA Otieno
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, Personal Injury, Judicial Discretion, Appeals Process
Source Language
en
Tort Law Civil Procedure Assessment of Damages Personal Injury Judicial Discretion Appeals Process

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Silvester Musyoka Josphat

Appellant

Hadija Sawe Chlangaty Alias Pasters Khadija

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in its assessment of general damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenities.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court failed to consider relevant evidence and applicable legal principles in awarding damages.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant was entitled to appeal on general damages after seeking review on special damages.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court found that the trial court erred in its assessment of general damages by failing to consider relevant and recent medical evidence, particularly the report of Dr. Udayan, which showed the appellant's pain and disability persisted for over 14 months post-accident. The trial court also relied on outdated authorities, ignoring the principle that comparable injuries should attract comparable damages and that the value of money erodes over time. The appellate court held that these errors amounted to a misdirection in the exercise of judicial discretion, warranting interference. The court set aside the award of Kshs.450,000 and substituted it with Kshs.800,000 as general damages...

Court Disposition

appeal_allowed_in_part

Orders

  • The award of Kshs.450,000 as general damages by the trial court is set aside.
  • The appellant is awarded Kshs.800,000 as general damages for pain, suffering, and loss of amenities.