Victoria De Meo v Abdullahi H. Khalil & another [1994] KECA 94 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal ruled that foreign currency damages convert at the payment date, not the accident date, and raised the injured woman's compensation.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the proper date for conversion of damages awarded in Italian Lira into Kenya Shillings was the date of the accident or the date of payment
- 2.Whether the award of Kshs 250,000/- in general damages was so inordinately low as to warrant appellate interference
Key legal issues
#Date of conversion of foreign currency awards
Following Miliangos, the rate of conversion of a foreign currency award is fixed at the date of payment, not the date of the accident or judgment.
The court adopted its earlier decision in Mollo Edilio v Abdullahi Hemed, which followed Miliangos v George Frank (Textiles) Ltd. Because of delays between accrual, suit, judgment, possible appeal and execution, fixing conversion at the accident date would distort value; the date of payment is appropriate. The respondents conceded this ground.
Appellate interference with quantum of general damages
The trial judge's failure to consider the final medical report establishing permanent incapacity was a fatal misdirection omitting a relevant factor, justifying disturbance of the award.
Restating Kemfro Africa Ltd v Lubia, the court held it may interfere where an irrelevant factor was considered, a relevant one omitted, or the award is a wholly erroneous estimate. The learned judge overlooked expert evidence of permanent incapacity and expressly aimed to avoid excessive awards without regard to inordinately low ones; the Kshs 250,000/- award was inordinately low and was raised to Kshs 350,000/-.
Legal principles established
#- The appropriate date for conversion of foreign currency damages into local currency is the date of payment.
- An appellate court may interfere with quantum only where the trial judge took into account an irrelevant factor, left out a relevant one, or the amount is so inordinately low or high as to be a wholly erroneous estimate.
Court orders
#- 1.Ground one of appeal allowed: the date fixed by the trial judge for conversion of the Italian Lira is set aside and substituted with the date of payment
- 2.Appeal allowed; judgment and orders of the superior court set aside
- 3.Substituted award of Kshs 350,000/- general damages
- 4.Appellant to have the costs of the appeal
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- High Court (superior court)
- HCCC Case No 323 of 1987
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal over appeals from the High Court in civil matters
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In our view the appropriate date for conversion is the date of payment.
The principles to be observed by the appellate court in deciding whether it is justified in disturbing the quantum of damages awarded by a trial judge were held by the former Court of Appeal of Eastern Africa to be that it must be satisfied that either that the judge, in assessing the damages, took into account an irrelevant factor, or left out of account a relevant one, or that, short of this, the amount is so inordinately low or so inordinately high that it must be a wholly erroneous estimate of the damage. This Court follows the same principles.
In the result, we allow the appeal, set aside the judgment and orders of the superior court and substitute therefor an award of Kshs 350,000/- general damages. The appellant will have the costs of the appeal.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment gives inconsistent dates for the accident, first stating 27th March 1986, then referring to the trial judge mistakenly fixing the conversion date as 25th March 1986 'when in fact, it was on the 27th March, 1986', while ground one of the memorandum of appeal itself refers to 25th March (sic) 27th March 1986.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Victoria De Meo v Abdullahi H. Khalil & another [1994] KECA 94 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1994). Civil Appeal (from HCCC Case No 323 of 1987). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1994/94/eng@1994-01-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.