REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE’S COURT AT BUNGOMA CIVIL CASE NO. E201, 204, 205, 207, 208, 214, & 217 , 222 OF 2025 LEONARD JUMA OKUMU & OTHERS…………………………………..PLAINTIFF VERSUS ANDREW OMONDI OWINO……………………….………. ………………….DEFENDANT JUDGMENT 1. This judgment will determine Bungoma CMC CC Nos. E201, 204, 205, 207, 208, 214, & 217 all of 2025 (“the series”) since the Plaintiffs in the series sustained almost similar injuries, and they were all passengers in one motor vehicle at the time of the accident. 2. The Plaintiffs sued the Defendant through Plaints dated 07 th May 2025, seeking judgment against the Defendant for: a) General damages b) Special damages c) Costs of this suit d) Interest on (a), (b), and (c) above e) Any other relief as this Honourable Court may deem fit to grant 3. The Plaintiffs pleaded that the cause of action in their respective Plaints arose on 27th March 2025, while they were lawful fare-paying passengers aboard motor vehicle registration number KCV 288 P (“the motor vehicle”) along Bungoma – Mumias road at Sibembe area when the motor vehicle lost control and rolled, thereby causing them severe bodily injuries, loss, and damage, hence their suits. 4. It was also pleaded by the Plaintiffs that the accident herein was solely caused by negligence by the Defendant and the Defendant’s driver, as enumerated in paragraph 5 of the Plaint.
page 1 of 8
5. The Defendant entered appearance and filed a Statement of Defence denying all the averments in the Plaintiffs’ Plaint save for an admission of this court’s jurisdiction to hear and determine the Plaintiffs’ suits. 6. Further, the Defendant pleaded that if the accident herein occurred, then the same was caused by the Plaintiffs’ negligence. The Defendant urged this court to dismiss the Plaintiffs’ suits with costs. 7. It is against this backdrop that this court set down this matter for hearing for the parties herein to prove the averments in their respective pleadings on a balance of probabilities. EVIDENCE 8. On 02nd December 2025, the parties herein recorded a consent admitting the Plaintiffs’ witness statements on record as the Plaintiffs’ evidence in chief and the Plaintiffs’ documents on record as exhibits. 9. The parties also selected Bungoma CMC CC No. E215 of 2026 as the test suit on liability in respect to this case, as well as all the cases in the series of matters arising from the accident herein. 10. This court assessed liability in the test suit at 100% against the Defendant in favour of the Plaintiff. ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION 11. Given the consent on record, the only issue for determination is quantum. Quantum of Damages (a) 12. General Damages for pain and suffering The injuries pleaded by the Plaintiffs in paragraph 7 of their respective Plaints were corroborated by their respective uncontroverted medical evidence on record. 13. It is against this backdrop that this court finds and holds that the Plaintiffs in the series proved on a balance of probabilities that they
page 2 of 8
sustained moderate multiple soft tissue injuries which they have recovered from. 14. The law on assessment of general damages in this jurisdiction, as espoused in Denshire Muteti Wambua v Kenya Power & Lighting Co. Ltd [2013] eKLR, is that comparable injuries should be compensated by comparable awards. 15. In Kenya Power Lighting Comp. Ltd & Another v Zakayo Saitoti Naingola & Another [2008] eKLR, Nambuye, J. (as she then was) listed the following principles on assessment of damages: a) Damages should not be inordinately too high or too low b) They are meant to compensate a party, for the loss suffered but not to enrich a party, and as such they should be commensurate to the injuries suffered c) Where past decisions are taken into consideration, they should be taken as mere guides and each case depends on its own facts. d) Where past awards are taken into consideration as guides an element of inflation should be taken into account as well as the purchasing power of the Kenyan shillings, then at the time of the judgment. 16.This court has given due regard to the guidelines in the authorities above, as well as the written submissions on record by the parties herein on quantum. 17. The injuries sustained by the Plaintiff herein are almost similar to the injuries sustained by the Plaintiff in Surian Enterprises Ltd v Mary Bahati Peter (Civil Appeal No. E199 of 2021) (2023) KEHC 202426 (KLR), where the court made an award of Kshs. 150,000/=
page 3 of 8
for multiple soft tissue injuries, including a deep cut on the forehead, and blunt injury to the right knee. 18. In Oloo v Arika & another (Civil Appeal E080 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 2889 (KLR), the court made an award of Kshs. 150,000/= for a head injury, left and right leg injury, superficial bruises to both knees, face, and scalp, chest injury, soft tissue injuries on the fingers, bruises, and lacerations on various parts of the body. 19. Guided by the authorities above, this court finds an award of Kshs 150,000/= to be reasonable compensation under this head for all the Plaintiffs in the series. (b) 20. Special Damages The Plaintiffs pleaded for special damages in paragraph 7 of their respective Plaints. The special damages included claims for treatment expenses, medical report, filling the P3 form, for the police abstract, and for the motor vehicle search. 21. The police abstracts herein were issued by police officers. The Plaintiffs’ P3 forms were filled in a public hospital. Therefore, the Plaintiffs in the series cannot seek to recover from the Defendant the cost of filling public documents, which, as a matter of government policy, are to be issued and filled free of charge. 22. If the Plaintiffs paid public officers for free public services, the Plaintiffs were engaged in an illegality that they cannot seek to benefit from. 23. In any event, the Plaintiff did not place before this court receipts to prove the claimed expenditure for filling the P3 form and the police abstract.
page 4 of 8
24. Special damages in the respective cases in the series are assessed as follows: (a) CC No. E201 of 2025 The receipt from NTSA proved the claim for Kshs. 550/= for motor vehicle search, the receipt from Dr. Sokobe proved the claim for Kshs. 6,000/= for the medical report, while the receipts from Bungoma County Referral Hospital proved treatment expenses of Kshs. 840/=. The Plaintiff is thus awarded special damages of Kshs. 7,390/= (b)CC No. E204 of 2025 The receipt from NTSA proved the claim for Kshs. 550/= for motor vehicle search, the receipt from Dr. Sokobe proved the claim for Kshs. 6,000/= for the medical report, while the receipts from Bungoma County Referral Hospital proved treatment expenses of Kshs. 420/=. The Plaintiff is thus awarded special damages of Kshs. 6,970/= (c) CC No. E205 of 2025 The receipt from NTSA proved the claim for Kshs. 550/= for motor vehicle search, the receipt from Dr. Sokobe proved the claim for Kshs. 6,000/= for the medical report, while the receipts from Bungoma County Referral Hospital proved treatment expenses of Kshs. 640/=. The Plaintiff is thus awarded special damages of Kshs. 7,190/= (d)CC No. E207 of 2025 The receipt from NTSA proved the claim for Kshs. 550/= for motor vehicle search, the receipt from Dr. Sokobe proved the claim for Kshs. 6,000/= for the medical report, while the receipts
page 5 of 8
from Bungoma County Referral Hospital proved treatment expenses of Kshs. 860/=. The Plaintiff is thus awarded special damages of Kshs. 7,410/= (e) CC No. E208 of 2025 The receipt from NTSA proved the claim for Kshs. 550/= for motor vehicle search, the receipt from Dr. Sokobe proved the claim for Kshs. 6,000/= for the medical report, while the receipts from Bungoma County Referral Hospital proved treatment expenses of Kshs. 420/=. The Plaintiff is thus awarded special damages of Kshs. 6,970/= (f) CC No. E214 of 2025 The receipt from NTSA proved the claim for Kshs. 550/= for motor vehicle search, and the receipt from Dr. Sokobe proved the claim for Kshs. 6,000/= for the medical report. The invoice dated 29th March 2024 (sic) for Kshs. 3,920/= without a corresponding receipt or an endorsement with the word “paid” cannot be used to claim the pleaded medical expenses since an invoice is not proof of payment. The Plaintiff is thus awarded special damages of Kshs. 6,550/= (g)CC No. E222 of 2025 The receipt from NTSA proved the claim for Kshs. 550/= for motor vehicle search, the receipt from Dr. Sokobe proved the claim for Kshs. 6,000/= for the medical report, while the receipts from Bungoma County Referral Hospital proved treatment expenses of Kshs. 790/=. The Plaintiff is thus awarded special damages of Kshs. 7,340/=
page 6 of 8
DETERMINATION 25. The upshot of the above is that judgment in the series is entered against the Defendant in the following terms: (a) CC No. E201 of 2025 i. Liability………………100% ii. General damages…..Kshs. 150,000/= iii. Special damages…...Kshs. 7,390/= Total Award………Kshs. 157,390/= (b)CC No. E204 of 2025 i. Liability………………100% ii. General damages…..Kshs. 150,000/= iii. Special damages…...Kshs. 6,970/= Total Award………Kshs. 156,970/= (c) CC No. E205 of 2025 i. Liability………………100% ii. General damages…..Kshs. 150,000/= iii. Special damages…...Kshs. 7,190/= Total Award………Kshs. 157,190/= (d)CC No. E207 of 2025 i. Liability………………100% ii. General damages…..Kshs. 150,000/= iii. Special damages…...Kshs. 7,410/= Total Award………Kshs. 157,410/= (e) CC No. E208 of 2025 i. Liability………………100% ii. General damages…..Kshs. 150,000/= iii. Special damages…...Kshs. 6,970/= Total Award………Kshs. 156,970/=
page 7 of 8
(f) CC No. E214 of 2025 i. Liability………………100% ii. General damages…..Kshs. 150,000/= iii. Special damages…...Kshs. 6,550/= Total Award………Kshs. 156,550/= (g)CC No. E222 of 2025 i. Liability………………100% ii. General damages…..Kshs. 150,000/= iii. Special damages…...Kshs. 7,340/= Total Award………Kshs. 157,340/= The General Damages will accrue interest at court rate from the date of this judgment till payment in full while the Special Damages will accrue interest at court rate from the date of filing this suit till payment in full. 26. The Plaintiffs will have the costs of their respective suits. 27. Judgment accordingly. Read, signed, and delivered in open Court at Bungoma this 28th day of April 2026 T.O. OMONO SENIOR RESIDENT MAGISTRATE In the presence of: Ms. Chebet for the Plaintiff Mr. Choni for the Defendant C/A: Mr. Rioba
page 8 of 8