Manyara v Muracha (Environment and Land Appeal E092 of 2021) [2024] KEELC 96 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the trial magistrate erred in failing to assess general damages despite finding the appellant's case proved
Yes - having found the case proved, the magistrate was bound to assess general damages; her failure was an error of law
The appellant's submissions invoked Section 78 of the Civil Procedure Act and authorities including Masinga Ndonga Ndonye v Kualam Limited, Andrew Mwori Kasaya v Kenya Bus Service and Gladys Wanjiru Njaramba v Globe Pharmacy, arguing that assessment of general damages must be undertaken even if the suit is dismissed. The court found the magistrate had concluded the appellant proved his case on a balance of probabilities, yet declined damages on the ground they were not proved, which was an error. The respondent's contrary argument relied on the expert report showing no present damage, but the court held the magistrate's own finding obliged her to assess damages.
Whether this Court has jurisdiction on a first appeal to assess general damages not assessed by the trial court
Yes - pursuant to Section 78 of the Civil Procedure Act and the court's powers under Section 13(7)(c) of the ELC Act, it proceeded to assess damages itself
The appellant submitted, relying on Section 78 of the Civil Procedure Act, that the High Court has jurisdiction to undertake assessment of general damages where the trial court failed to do so. The court agreed and, invoking Section 13(7)(c) of the ELC Act empowering it to award damages, proceeded to quantify general damages at Kshs. 500,000/= rather than remitting the matter for assessment.
What quantum of general damages is appropriate
Kshs. 500,000/=, not the Kshs. 3,000,000/= claimed
The appellant urged Kshs. 3,000,000/= based on an Engineer's Assessment Report, while the respondent did not submit on any figure, contending instead that the expert report did not confirm any present damage. Considering all the circumstances, the court held that Kshs. 500,000/= would be adequate compensation for the respondent's actions, with interest from the date of the lower court's judgment.
Legal principles established
#- Where a trial court finds that a plaintiff has proved his case, it errs in law by failing to assess and award general damages even if it would ultimately dismiss the claim
- On a first appeal the court must re-evaluate the evidence and make its own findings, bearing in mind that the trial court had the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses
- General damages are the direct, natural and probable consequences of the action complained of
Court orders
#- 1.General damages of Kshs.500,000/= awarded to the appellant.
- 2.Costs of the judgment of the lower court and the Appeal to be paid by the respondent.
- 3.Interest at court rate to accrue from the date of judgment of the lower court until payment in full.
- On appeal from
- Chief Magistrates Court, Milimani, Nairobi
- Milimani Commercial Court Civil Case No. 3111 of 2018
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 78 of the Civil Procedure Act (first appeal)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Manyara v Muracha (Environment and Land Appeal E092 of 2021) [2024] KEELC 96 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). ELC Appeal (Nairobi) arising from Milimani Chief Magistrates Court Civil Case No. 3111 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/96/eng@2024-01-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.