[2018] KEHC 6662 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 6662 (KLR)

The High Court found that the trial magistrate applied the correct legal principles in assessing both general and special damages. The award of Kshs. 700,000 for general damages was justified by the combination and severity of injuries, as supported by medical evidence and comparable case law. The court held that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEHC 6662 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Trans Energy (K) Limited; Respondent: Ann Wambui Kirigi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 273 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Judges
A Mbogholi-Msagha
Legal Topics
Personal Injury, Assessment of Damages, Special Damages, Appeals on Quantum
Source Language
en
Tort Law Civil Procedure Personal Injury Assessment of Damages Special Damages Appeals on Quantum

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trans Energy (K) Limited

Appellant

Ann Wambui Kirigi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the award of Kshs. 700,000 in general damages was excessive in relation to the injuries sustained by the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the award of Kshs. 42,231 in special damages contravened the Stamp Duty Act and was properly proved.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court found that the trial magistrate applied the correct legal principles in assessing both general and special damages. The award of Kshs. 700,000 for general damages was justified by the combination and severity of injuries, as supported by medical evidence and comparable case law. The court held that the award was not inordinately high to warrant appellate interference. On special damages, the court found that the receipts produced met the legal standard for proof, and the issue of stamp duty, raised only in submissions and not during trial, could not be entertained. Consequently, the appeal lacked merit and was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.