[2025] KEHC 2953 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 2953 (KLR)

The court found that the appeal was incompetent due to the appellant's failure to include a certified copy of the decree in the record of appeal, as required by law and binding Supreme Court precedent. This omission is fatal and deprives the court of jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. On the merits, the court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 2953 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Watu Credit Co. Limited; Respondent: Ezra Siundu Wanjala
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Bungoma
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 54 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as incompetent with costs to the respondent.
Judges
REA Ougo
Legal Topics
Appeal Incompetence, Damages Assessment, Soft Tissue Injuries, Record of Appeal Requirements
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Tort Law Appeal Incompetence Damages Assessment Soft Tissue Injuries Record of Appeal Requirements

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Watu Credit Co. Limited

Appellant

Ezra Siundu Wanjala

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the appeal is incompetent for failure to annex a certified copy of the decree in the record of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the award of Kshs. 350,000 for general damages was excessive given the nature of injuries sustained by the respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appeal was incompetent due to the appellant's failure to include a certified copy of the decree in the record of appeal, as required by law and binding Supreme Court precedent. This omission is fatal and deprives the court of jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. On the merits, the court observed that the award of general damages by the trial court was arguably on the higher side given the nature of the respondent's soft tissue injuries, but since the appeal was incompetent, the court could not interfere with the award. The appeal was therefore dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as incompetent with costs to the respondent.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction due to failure to annex a certified copy of the decree.
  • Costs of the appeal are awarded to the respondent.