Karanja v Inter Continental Hotel & another [1987] KECA 74 (KLR)

Relying on the locus classicus in Flint v Lovell, the court held that a mere preference for a different figure is insufficient. As the trial judge applied no wrong principle of law, the only question was whether Kshs 2,000 was so very small as to be an entirely erroneous estimate, which the court answered in the negative without hesitation.

Counsel relied on Lane v Halloway, which barred reduction of pecuniary compensation for provocation, following Fontin v Katapodis. The court found Lane v Halloway unreliable and punctured by Gray v Barr and Murphy v Culhane, where Lord Denning held that a judge may take into account circumstances mitigating damages. The court preferred those decisions as truer reflections of the common law and consistent with contributory negligence principles.

The appellant argued the judge awarded only for loss of dignity, ignoring pain and suffering. The court held that on the judge's own wording the sum was global, and that the judge was entitled to disbelieve the medical and viva voce evidence of serious injury, noting the appellant never mentioned injuries to police the night of the alleged assault.

Once the implied licence to remain on the premises was revoked, the appellant became a trespasser who could lawfully be evicted with reasonable force. Having acted without dignity, he had no dignity to lose, as Platt and Nyarangi JJA concurred. The judge's only reservation was that the force used exceeded what was reasonable.