Bildad v Rentwork East Africa Limited (Civil Appeal E051 of 2021) [2024] KECA 1133 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal upheld a reduced Kshs.600,000 injury award, confirming second appeals only examine legal errors, not facts or damages amounts.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Scope of the Court of Appeal's jurisdiction on a second appeal
The Court's jurisdiction is limited to matters of law; it will not revisit facts unless the lower courts considered or failed to consider relevant matters or the decision is perverse.
Relying on Maina v Mugiria and the dictum of Onyango Otieno, JA in Kenya Breweries Ltd v Godfrey Odongo, the Court distinguished a first appeal (a retrial on facts) from a second appeal, in which the Court must resist the temptation of delving into matters of facts and confine itself to questions of law.
Competence of the first appeal for want of a certified copy of the decree
The omission is no longer fatal; it is a mere technicality inconsistent with the overriding objective and Article 159(2)(d).
The Court endorsed the position in Emmanuel Ngade Nyoka v Kitheka Mutisya Ngata that striking out an appeal for the omission would run counter to the overriding objective in sections 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act and to substantive justice. The Court also noted the appellant never sought to strike out the appeal at a preliminary stage.
Whether the High Court erred in reducing general damages from Kshs.2,000,000.00 to Kshs.600,000.00
The High Court correctly found the trial award excessive and based on unproven material; the appeal against the reduction was dismissed.
The medical evidence, particularly Dr. Wokabi's report, showed the appellant had recovered fully with all CT scans, MRIs and EEGs normal. PTSD was not pleaded in the plaint, and no psychiatrist's report established permanent disability, so the trial court's award rested on an irrelevant and unproven fact.
Legal principles established
#- On a second appeal, the Court of Appeal confines itself to matters of law and will interfere only where the lower courts considered matters they should not have, failed to consider matters they should have, or the decision is perverse
- An appellate court will not disturb an award of general damages unless it is inordinately high or low as to represent an entirely erroneous estimate of the injuries suffered
- Failure to attach a certified copy of the decree is no longer a jurisdictional ground requiring the striking out of an appeal; courts now favour substantive justice over technicalities under sections 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act and Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution
- General damages in a road traffic accident are evaluated on the basis of the nature and extent of the injuries suffered and comparable past awards
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal is dismissed
- 2.The appellant to pay the costs of the appeal
- On appeal from
- High Court at Meru
- Not stated in the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Second appeal to the Court of Appeal limited to matters of law only
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Bildad v Rentwork East Africa Limited (Civil Appeal E051 of 2021) [2024] KECA 1133 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Civil Appeal No E051 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2024/1133/eng@2024-09-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.