Boniface Nzau Muia v Shengli Engineering Construction Company & Another

The claimant alleged he was dismissed when he returned to work after recovering, but in oral evidence he stated he could not work due to the injuries suffered. The respondent's witness testified the claimant indicated he was unwilling to return to work after recovery. On this evidence the court found the dismissal claim disputable and not tenable, and refused the consequential contractual dues of Kshs. 138,634.

The employment relationship and the injury at the Kahonoki quarry crusher were admitted or proved. The respondent attributed the injury to the claimant's own negligence, but the machine that injured him was operated by another employee, and nothing the claimant did or omitted to do was established as negligent. The respondent therefore bore full liability.

Counsel relied on Milicent Atieno Ochuonyo v Katola Richard, where 20% permanent incapacity attracted Kshs. 2,000,000. The claimant suffered 10% permanent incapacity, so the court scaled down to Kshs. 1,500,000 while factoring in inflationary trends since the comparable award.

The claimant, aged 37 at the time of the accident and earning Kshs. 16,021 monthly, claimed he could no longer perform casual jobs due to incapacity. He sought a multiplier of 33 years yielding about Kshs. 1,268,863 on a 20% disability factor. The court awarded a reduced global figure of Kshs. 1 million for loss of future earnings.

The respondent argued the claimant could not be paid twice for the same injuries since he had claimed under WIBA. The court recorded that a WIBA claim was made and that the claimant admitted receiving compensation (Kshs. 61,404 or Kshs. 51,000 per his testimony), but gave no breakdown, and proceeded to award damages without expressly holding the WIBA payment a bar.