Nariki & another (Suing as the Legal Representatives of the Estate of Christopher Musoga Sagana (Deceased)) v Onyango & another (Civil Case E142 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 623 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Bungoma court awarded a crash victim's family Kshs. 1.25 million but cut it by 20% because he crossed the road outside a designated crossing.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Liability for the fatal accident
Liability apportioned 80%:20% in favour of the Plaintiffs against the Defendants jointly and severally
The eyewitness accounts conflicted. The Defendants' investigation report, including sketch plan and scene photos, corroborated their version that the deceased crossed at an undesignated area. The Plaintiffs failed to call the investigating officer or produce the sketch plan. The deceased breached the Highway Code, contributing to the accident, but the driver still owed a higher duty of care as the driver of a dangerous machine.
Loss of dependency
Global award of Kshs. 1,200,000/= adopted instead of the multiplier approach
The Plaintiffs conceded that the deceased's occupation and income were not proved, making the multiplier approach speculative. The court adopted a global award informed by comparable authorities where awards of Kshs. 1,000,000/= to Kshs. 1,700,000/= were made for deceased persons of similar age and dependants.
Loss of expectation of life and pain and suffering
Conventional award of Kshs. 100,000/= under each head
The deceased died aged 43 with no evidence of ill health, and died some hours after the accident. Applying the conventional figures in the authorities cited, the court awarded Kshs. 100,000/= for each head.
Funeral expenses
Kshs. 150,000/= awarded as reasonable funeral expenses despite absence of receipts
Relying on Premier Diary Limited v Amarjit Singh Sagoo, the court held that bereaved families should not be expected to keep records, and courts should take judicial notice of funeral expenses and make a reasonable award. Kshs. 150,000/= was found reasonable for a 43-year-old man.
Legal principles established
#- An entry in a police abstract that a driver was to be charged with a traffic offence is not conclusive evidence of blame
- Breach of the Highway Code may be relied upon to establish or negate liability in civil proceedings
- A driver owes a duty of care even to pedestrians wrongfully on the road
- Where the multiplicand cannot be ascertained, a global award may be made instead of the multiplier approach
- Funeral expenses may be awarded without receipts on judicial notice
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered against the Defendants jointly and severally
- 2.Liability apportioned 80%:20% in favour of the Plaintiffs
- 3.Loss of dependency Kshs. 1,200,000/=
- 4.Pain and suffering Kshs. 100,000/=
- 5.Loss of expectation of life Kshs. 100,000/=
- 6.Special damages Kshs. 12,650/=
- 7.Reasonable funeral expenses Kshs. 150,000/=
- 8.Grand award Kshs. 1,562,650/= less 20% = Net award Kshs. 1,250,120/=
- 9.General damages to accrue interest at court rate from date of judgment till payment in full
- 10.Special damages to accrue interest at court rate from date of filing suit till payment in full
- 11.Costs of the suit to the Plaintiffs, subject to the ratio of liability
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the magistrates' court over a fatal accident claim under the Fatal Accidents Act and Law Reform Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nariki & another (Suing as the Legal Representatives of the Estate of Christopher Musoga Sagana (Deceased)) v Onyango & another (Civil Case E142 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 623 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2026/623/eng@2026-03-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.