SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

David Makau v Maua Mutie Ndunda [2014] KEHC 1908 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 1908 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
1908
Citation
[2014] KEHC 1908 (KLR)
Decided
23 September 2014
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from the original judgment in Machakos Chief Magistrate’s Court Civil Case No. No. 143 of 2003CoramL.N. MUTENDE
Holding

The appeal succeeds partially. The award in respect of the respondent will be Kshs. 184,480.

Facts

The deceased, Mutie Ndunda Makau, was involved in an accident on or about July 17, 1993, along Machakos Kitui road near Kwa Nthei. The deceased was cycling when he was hit by a motor-vehicle owned by David N. Makau.

Issues

  1. Whether the trial magistrate erred in finding the appellant liable for the accident.
  2. Whether the trial magistrate erred in awarding damages.
  3. Whether the trial magistrate erred in apportioning liability between the appellant and the deceased.

Reasoning

The court found that the deceased was not wholly or substantially to blame for the accident and that the appellant should be held liable for 50% of the damages. The court also found that the award of Kshs. 70,000 for loss of expectation of life was excessive and reduced it to Kshs. 10,000.

Outcome

The appeal is partly successful.

Orders

  • The respondent shall be entitled to Kshs. 184,480 in damages.
  • The respondent shall be entitled to costs and interest in the Lower Court.
  • Costs of the appeal shall be borne by each party.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (2)
  • Julius Kamau versus Njue Kiarie and Another–HCCC No. 5725 of 1989
  • Fredrick Gatara Mungai versus George N. Kiboronji and James Njoroge Nairobi HCCC No. 1993 of 1990
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case