Makola v Wamaitha & another (Civil Case E006 of 2024) [2024] SCC 7 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Lamu Small Claims Court held salon assaulters fully liable for battery, awarding about Kshs.71,000 because no medical report proved worse injuries.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Liability for the tort of battery
The respondents were held 100% liable jointly and severally for battery
The claimant testified that on 27/5/2024 the respondents assaulted her at her salon in Witu with blows and kicks without justification, rendering her unconscious and destroying property. A P3 form confirmed injuries assessed as harm. The respondents did not respond or rebut, and the court found the uncontroverted evidence established battery.
Quantum of damages for battery
General damages of Kshs.60,000/= awarded
The court adopted the principle that similar injuries should attract similar awards. Since no medical report classified the type or severity of the soft tissue injuries, the court followed the award of Kshs.60,000/= for battery damages in Eunice Auma Onyango v Salin Akinyi Oluoch rather than the Kshs.200,000/= sought.
Special damages
Kshs.10,900/= for destroyed salon property (2 plastic chairs, blow dryer machine, Tecno phone) proved by receipts and allowed
Special damages must be specifically pleaded and proved. The court examined the receipts produced and found they sufficiently proved the pleaded expenses.
Legal principles established
#- Similar injuries should attract similar awards in terms of compensation
- Special damages must be specifically pleaded and proved
Court orders
#- 1.The claim succeeds and the respondents are found 100% liable jointly and severally
- 2.The claimant is awarded Kshs.60,000/= as damages for the tort of battery
- 3.The claimant is also awarded Kshs.10,900/= as special damages
- 4.The claimant is awarded costs and interest of the claim; interest on general damages from the date of judgment and special damages from the date of filing of claim until payment in full
- 5.Let the file be closed forthwith
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Small Claims Court Act (original jurisdiction over the claim; provision not specified in judgment)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Makola v Wamaitha & another (Civil Case E006 of 2024) [2024] SCC 7 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/scc/2024/7/eng@2024-11-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.