Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedMemorandum of Appeal dated 9th August 2024· [2025] KEELRC 3725 (KLR)

Bhachu Industries Limited v Ngui (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E225 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 3725 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya (appellate jurisdiction over subordinate court)
19 November 2025
DMD. K. Njagi Marete
836 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's High Court upheld a Kshs 502,000 award to a worker whose finger was crushed at work, ruling the employer failed to prove safety gear was issued.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an appeal against a subordinate court's judgment of 31st July 2024 assessing general damages at Kshs. 502,000.00 for a workplace injury in which the Respondent's middle fingertip was crushed and amputated while feeding a pipe into a bending machine. The Appellant raised five grounds: that the Respondent was not entitled to the damages awarded; that the award was excessive for a minor soft tissue injury which had fully healed leaving only a minor scar; that the trial court failed to distinguish the authorities cited; that it failed to consider the medical reports; and that it ignored the second medical report categorising the injury as fully healed. The Appellant relied on an issuance record of gloves dated 26th February 2016 and on Kenya Akiba Micro Financing Ltd v Ezekiel Chebii & 14 others on authenticity versus admissibility of documents. The Respondent denied signing the PPE documents, attacked the credibility of DW1 (who was not employed by the Appellant in 2016 and produced no employment records), and invoked the Evidence Act on the flawed nature of the Appellant's evidence, relying on Mugambi and Silas vs Isaiah Gitiru and China Road & Bridge Construction vs James Ponda to defend the quantum. The court agreed with the Respondent, holding that no default in the award had been established, that the quantum matched authoritative decisions, and that the Appellant had failed to controvert negligence and had produced only uncorroborated evidence on PPEs. The appeal was dismissed with each party bearing their own costs. Delivered on 19th November 2025 by D. K. Njagi Marete, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Sufficiency of the award of general damages for a minor soft tissue injury

Holding

The award of Kshs. 502,000.00 was appropriate and consistent with established decisions; the appeal on quantum failed

Reasoning

The court found that the trial court's quantum agreed with authoritative decisions and that the Appellant failed to displace the Respondent's negligence case or show any error in the assessment.

p. 2
02

Admissibility and weight of the PPE issuance record

Holding

Authenticity objections go to weight, not admissibility, but the Appellant's evidence on PPEs remained uncorroborated

Reasoning

Relying on Kenya Akiba Micro Financing, the court accepted that authenticity challenges go to weight, yet found the Appellant's uncorroborated PPE evidence insufficient to defeat the negligence claim.

p. 2
03

Burden of controverting negligence and flawed evidence

Holding

The Appellant failed to controvert the Respondent's case of negligence

Reasoning

The Respondent invoked sections 107, 109 and (as printed) 70 of the Evidence Act to impugn the Appellant's evidence; the court found the Appellant's case uncorroborated, particularly on PPE issuance.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Questions of authenticity of documents go to the weight of the evidence rather than admissibility
  • An appellate court will not disturb a trial court's award of damages absent demonstration of a default in the award

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Appeal dismissed
  2. 2.Each party to bear their own costs of the appeal
On appeal from
Trial court (subordinate court)
Jurisdiction invoked
Appellate jurisdiction over the trial court's judgment on assessment of damages

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Bhachu Industries Limited v Ngui (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E225 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 3725 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Memorandum of Appeal dated 9th August 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/3725/eng@2025-11-19

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.