Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Small ClaimsAllowedNot stated in the judgment

Gatheru v Bernard (Civil Case E092 of 2025) [2026] SCC 18 (KLR)

Small Claims Court
19 January 2026
1,370 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Lamu court awarded Kshs.322,550 to a road accident passenger after the driver ignored the case, showing skipping court guarantees losing.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a first-instance Small Claims Court claim at Lamu arising from a road traffic accident on 11/10/2025 in which the claimant, a lawful passenger aboard motor vehicle KDR344W travelling along the Nairobi-Mombasa highway in Taita Taveta County, was injured when the respondent's vehicle KDB 237J allegedly overtook unsafely, lost control and rammed into her vehicle. She sustained right and left knee contusions and lumbo sacral sprain. The respondent was served but did not enter appearance or file a defence; interlocutory judgment was entered and the matter proceeded by way of documents only. The Adjudicator, F.M. Mulama, framed three issues: liability, quantum, and costs. On liability, relying on William Wagura Maigua v Elbur Flora Limited, the court held that entry of interlocutory judgment settled liability and found the respondent 100% liable jointly and severally. On quantum, the court applied the principle that comparable injuries attract comparable awards, reviewed the medical report by Doctor Wisdom Njumwa confirming soft tissue injuries with anticipated full recovery, considered comparable authorities and economic factors, and awarded Kshs.300,000/= general damages. Proved special damages of Kshs.3,550/= and particularized future medical expenses of Kshs.19,000/= were allowed. The claimant was awarded costs and interest from the date of judgment until payment in full, and the file was closed. Total award: Kshs.322,550/=.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the Respondent is liable for the accident
  2. 2.What is the quantum of damages awardable if any
  3. 3.Who bears costs of the claim

Key legal issues

#
01

Liability where interlocutory judgment has been entered

Holding

The respondent, having been served but failing to enter appearance, was 100% liable jointly and severally; the claimant need not prove liability.

Reasoning

Interlocutory judgment had been entered as against the respondent who was served but never entered appearance or filed a defence. Relying on William Wagura Maigua v Elbur Flora Limited, the court held that entry of interlocutory judgment settles the issue of liability, so no formal proof of liability was required, only assessment of quantum.

p. 2
02

Quantum of general damages for soft tissue injuries

Holding

An award of Kshs.300,000/= as general damages adequately compensated the claimant for right and left knee contusions and lumbo sacral sprain.

Reasoning

The court applied the principle that comparable injuries should attract comparable awards, reviewed authorities with awards ranging from Kshs.250,000/= to Kshs.3,800,000/= for more severe spinal injuries, considered inflation and the state of the economy, and concluded that Kshs.300,000/= fairly compensated the claimant for soft tissue injuries expected to fully recover.

p. 3
03

Special damages and future medical expenses

Holding

Special damages of Kshs.3,550/= proved on the record were allowed, and future medical expenses of Kshs.19,000/= particularized in the medical report were allowed as reasonable.

Reasoning

Special damages must be specifically pleaded and proved; the claimed Kshs.3,550/= for the medical report and motor vehicle records search was proved from the record. Future medical expenses estimated and itemized in the medical report at Kshs.19,000/= for medication and physiotherapy were found reasonable and allowed as prayed.

p. 3
04

Costs of the claim

Holding

Costs were awarded to the successful claimant on the principle that costs follow the event.

Reasoning

The court applied the basic rule that costs follow the event, emphasizing that the principle compensates the successful party for the trouble taken in prosecuting or defending the case rather than penalizing the losing party. The claimant having succeeded, costs were awarded to her.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Entry of interlocutory judgment against a defendant who fails to enter appearance settles liability, and the claimant is under no obligation to call evidence to prove it.
  • Comparable injuries should attract comparable awards in general damages.
  • Special damages must be specifically pleaded and proved.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The claim contained in the statement of claim dated 11th November 2025 is allowed with liability at 100%
  2. 2.General damages of Kshs.300,000/=, special damages of Kshs.3,550/= and future medical expenses of Kshs.19,000/=, totaling Kshs.322,550/= awarded to the claimant
  3. 3.The claimant is awarded costs and interests from the date of judgment until payment in full
  4. 4.The file to be closed forthwith

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

FM
F.M. MulamaAdjudicator
majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Small Claims Court Act (claim for damages arising from a road traffic accident; not expressly cited in the judgment)

Quotable passages

#

Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.

The court therefore makes a finding that the respondent is 100% liable for the accident jointly and severally.
p. 2Liability upon entry of interlocutory judgment
it is a settled principle that comparable injuries should attract comparable awards
p. 2Principle for assessment of general damages
On special damages, it is trite law that they have to be specifically pleaded and proved.
p. 3Proof of special damages
The claim contained in the statement of claim dated 11th November 2025 is allowed in the following terms. Liability 100% General damages Kshs.300,000/= Special damages Kshs. 3,550/= Future medical expenses Kshs.19,000/= Total Kshs.322,550/=
p. 3Final orders / disposition
The claimant is awarded costs and interests from the date of judgment until payment in full.
p. 4Costs and interest order

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

The judgment refers to the claimant inconsistently by gender, using both feminine and masculine pronouns for the same person.

minor

The judgment records the same pronoun inconsistency elsewhere, e.g. 'he sustained' for the claimant who is elsewhere 'she'.

minor

The judgment does not state the case number or the names of the parties, only 'claimant' and 'respondent'.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Gatheru v Bernard (Civil Case E092 of 2025) [2026] SCC 18 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/scc/2026/18/eng@2026-01-19

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