Ng’ang’a v Yunnah International Construction Company Ltd (Civil Case E182 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 758 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Bungoma court awarded a road accident victim Kshs. 516,130, cutting the claimed amount because she lacked receipts for some expenses.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Effect of the consent on liability apportionment
With liability fixed at 100% in favour of the Plaintiff by consent, the only issue left for determination was quantum.
On 12th February 2026 the parties recorded a consent adopting the 100% apportionment of liability in Bungoma CMC CC No. E181 of 2025. That removed any contested issue on negligence, leaving the court to determine only general and special damages.
Quantum of general damages for pain and suffering
An award of Kshs. 500,000/= was appropriate for a cut wound on the left chin, blunt injury to the chest, blunt injury to the right hip, and fracture of the left ulna.
The court applied the comparable-injuries principle, discounting the Plaintiff's authorities as involving more severe injuries and the Defendant's 2015 and 2020 authorities as outdated. It aligned the award with comparable cases awarding Kshs. 500,000/= for similar fractures, while factoring in inflation and purchasing power.
Proof of special damages
Special damages were held proved in the amount of Kshs. 16,130/= out of the Kshs. 23,750/= pleaded.
Special damages must be strictly proved. Receipts proved Kshs. 6,000/= for the medical report, Kshs. 9,580/= for treatment at Bungoma West Hospital, and Kshs. 550/= for copy of records; the P3 form and police abstract claims were conceded as unproven.
Consequence of a defendant failing to call witnesses
A defendant's unproved averments in a statement of defence remain mere allegations and cannot be relied upon.
Relying on Edward Mariga and CMC Aviation, the court held that pleadings are not evidence and that a defendant who calls no witness leaves only the plaintiff's version on record; the defence averments were therefore disregarded in determining the case.
Legal principles established
#- Comparable injuries should be compensated by comparable awards.
- A plaintiff who pleads special damages must strictly prove them before an award is made.
- Unsubstantiated averments in a defence where no witness is called remain mere allegations.
Court orders
#- 1.Liability at 100% against the Defendant
- 2.General damages of Kshs. 500,000/= for pain and suffering
- 3.Special damages of Kshs. 16,130/=
- 4.Total award of Kshs. 516,130/= against the Defendant
- 5.Interest on general damages at court rate from date of judgment till payment in full
- 6.Interest on special damages at court rate from date of filing suit till payment in full
- 7.Plaintiff to have the costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the magistrates' court over a negligence claim under the Traffic Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ng’ang’a v Yunnah International Construction Company Ltd (Civil Case E182 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 758 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Case No E182 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2026/758/eng@2026-04-14
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.