Rehema Adhiambo Marjan v Fanuel Abwaro & another [2001] KECA 150 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal reinstated a widow's fatal accident award after the bus company conceded liability, confirming defendants can admit fault on appeal and avoid re-proving negligence.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the plaintiff's suit as not proved on a balance of probability, given the respondents' concession of liability
- 2.What quantum of general and special damages should be awarded for the death of the deceased
Key legal issues
#Effect of respondents' concession of liability on appeal
The appeal was allowed on the basis of the respondents' unqualified concession of liability, with the quantum proposed by the respondents adopted by consent of both counsel.
Counsel for the respondents informed the court he could not resist the appeal, admitted the accident occurred as pleaded, and acknowledged the first respondent's conviction for causing death by dangerous driving. He proposed the general damages of Shs.600,000/= and special damages of Shs.57,548/= as reasonable, and appellant's counsel concurred. The court therefore allowed the appeal and entered judgment on those figures.
Abandonment of the claim under the Law Reform Act
The claim under the Law Reform Act was abandoned at trial because letters of administration of the deceased's estate had not been obtained before filing suit; the judgment proceeded only under the Fatal Accidents Act.
The plaintiff, widow of the deceased killed in a head-on collision between the respondents' bus and the deceased's matatu, sued under both the Fatal Accidents Act and the Law Reform Act. During trial the Law Reform Act claim was abandoned because no grant of letters of administration had been obtained before the suit was filed, leaving only the Fatal Accidents Act claim for determination.
Legal principles established
#- Where a defendant concedes liability on appeal, the appellate court may enter judgment on the concession without requiring the plaintiff to re-prove the case.
Court orders
#- 1.Appeal allowed
- 2.Judgment of the High Court set aside
- 3.Judgment entered for the plaintiff: special damages of Shs. 57,548/= and general damages under the Fatal Accidents Act of Shs. 600,000/=
- 4.Awards to bear interest at court rates
- 5.Plaintiff to have costs both in the Court of Appeal and in the court below
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
- H.C.C.C. No. 1225 of 1993
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal to the Court of Appeal from the High Court (statutory appellate jurisdiction; no specific provision 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.
In the result, we allow the appeal and set aside the judgment of the superior court. We enter judgment for the plaintiff as follows:
These awards will bear interest at Court rates. The plaintiff shall have costs both here and in the court below.
he could not resist the appeal and that he was conceding it
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Rehema Adhiambo Marjan v Fanuel Abwaro & another [2001] KECA 150 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2001). Civil Appeal No. 279 of 2000. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2001/150/eng@2001-07-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.