Cookie Policy
JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT
The appellants are dismayed by the paucity of damages which were awarded to them on 3rd December, 1992, by Mwera, J. in High Court Civil Case No.4831 of 1988. The learned Judge considered the medical evidence which was tendered before him and the appellants' respective oral evidence but was of the view that the appellants were grossly exaggerating the degree of their respective injuries.
The appellants now complain that the learned trial Judge misapprehended the evidence and thereby arrived at an inordinately low estimate of damages.
It is trite law that this court will not interfere with an award of damages by the trial court unless he has either misapprehended the evidence, or omitted to take into account a relevant factor in assessing damages or took into account irrelevant factors.
We have considered all the evidence which was before the learned Judge as we are supposed to as a first appellate court. In our view, while we think that the damages which were awarded to the respective appellants are low, we do not think that they are so low as to represent a wholly erroneous estimate as will call for our intervention. The learned Judge evaluated all the evidence and in effect agreed with the medical evidence that the appellants' were mainly soft tissue injuries and did not call for a substantial award. Clearly the Judge was right as we also think the appellants were grossly exaggerating the degree of their injuries. They even thought the doctors who medically examined them had underestimated the degree of their injuries.
In the above circumstances this appeal has no merit. It is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 31st day of October, 1997
R.S.C. OMOLO
............................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
A.A. LAKHA
...........................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
S.E.O. BOSIRE
..................................
AG. JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR