Jah Hendricks v David Charo Sirya [2016] KEELRC 1629 (KLR)
- Court
- Employment & Labour Relations Court
- Case number
- 1629
- Citation
- [2016] KEELRC 1629 (KLR)
- Decided
- 26 February 2016
Summary at a glance
TypeAppealPostureAppeal from a decision on liability and damages in a negligence caseCoramONESMUS MAKAU
The court reversed the trial court's decision on liability and held that the employer and the respondent were equally 50% liable for the incident.
Facts
The respondent, a night security guard, was attacked and injured by thugs while on duty at a construction site. The respondent sued the employer for negligence, and the employer appealed the decision.
Issues
- Whether the trial court erred in finding the employer 100% liable for negligence.
- Whether the trial court erred in awarding the respondent kshs.480,000/= as general damages.
Reasoning
The court found that the employer provided adequate safety measures, but the respondent's testimony about the area's size and the need for additional guards was corroborated by other evidence.
Outcome
The appeal was allowed, reversing the trial court's decision on liability and awarding damages equally between the parties.
Orders
- Apportion liability equally between the employer and the respondent at 50:50%.
- Affirm the quantum of damages awarded.
Remedies
- Each party bears their own costs of the appeal.
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Loading judgment…