Devki Steel Mills Limited v Oduori (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal 10 of 2021) [2023] KEELRC 2169 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's High Court upheld a Kshs 5.3 million injury award against Devki Steel Mills, confirming that appeals on damages rarely succeed without proof of wrong legal principles.
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 award of Kshs 3,000,000 as general damages was inordinately high
- 2.Whether the Trial Magistrate erred in awarding damages for loss of future earnings of Kshs 2,330,496
Key legal issues
#Whether the general damages award of Kshs 3,000,000 was inordinately high
The court found the award on the higher side but not so excessive as to warrant interference; it declined to disturb it.
The court compared comparable authorities cited by both sides, noting the injuries were similar to those in Alpharama Limited but that case involved older injuries and awards. Applying the settled principles in Catholic Diocese of Kisumu v Sophia Achieng Tete and Southern Engineering Co Ltd v Musingi Mutia, it held that an appellate court will not substitute its own figure merely because it would have awarded a different one, absent wrong principles or misapprehension of evidence. The trial court had considered the authorities and the severe injuries.
Whether the trial court erred in awarding loss of future earnings of Kshs 2,330,496
The court upheld the award, finding the Respondent proved loss of future earnings and that the Trial Magistrate correctly assessed it using a multiplier of 17 on a monthly income of Kshs 11,424.
Both medical reports assessed permanent incapacity at 60% and confirmed complete incapacitation of the left hand. The Respondent's employment was terminated three months after resuming duty and he remained jobless, and the Appellant called no evidence to controvert this. Following SBI International Holdings v William Ambuga and Butler v Butler, the court held that whether characterized as loss of earnings or earning capacity, the award was proper since damages were payable on proved real assessable loss.
Legal principles established
#- An appellate court should not disturb an award of damages unless it is inordinately low or high, was arrived at on a misapprehension of the evidence, or on wrong principles of law.
- Loss of future earnings is compensation for real assessable loss proved by evidence, whereas loss of earning capacity is compensated as part of general damages.
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal is dismissed in its entirety
- 2.The appellant to pay the costs of the appeal
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Senior Principal Magistrate's Court at Machakos
- CMCC No. 539 of 2015
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction over the subordinate court's judgment ( Memorandum of Appeal against the judgment and decree in CMCC No. 539 of 2015); the judgment does not cite the specific statutory provision
Relief refused
#Setting aside the trial court's judgment on quantum and reassessment of damages downwards
The court found no fault with the trial court's reasons on general damages and found the award of loss of future earnings correctly assessed
Costs
The appeal is dismissed with costs to the Respondent.
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 end I find no merit in the appeal and accordingly dismiss the same with costs.
Although I find the award to have been on the higher side, I do not find any fault with the reasons given by the trial court and neither do I find it so excessive as to warrant my interference with the same.
I find that the Learned Trial Magistrate correctly assessed the Respondent's loss of future earnings at Kshs. 2,330,496. I find no reason to interfere with the judgment.
The appellate court can justifiably interfere with the quantum of damages awarded by the trial court only if it is satisfied that the trial court applied the wrong principles
Compensation for loss of future earnings is awarded for real assessable loss proved by evidence. Compensation for diminution in earning capacity is awarded as part of general damages.
Issues in the judgment
#The appeal number, court of first instance of this appeal and neutral citation are not stated anywhere in the judgment; only the trial court case (Machakos CMCC No. 539 of 2015) and the delivery venue (Eldoret) are given.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Wangui & 3 others v Prime Bridge Group Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E391 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 1124 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 1124 (KLR)26 Mar 2025
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Devki Steel Mills Limited v Oduori (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal 10 of 2021) [2023] KEELRC 2169 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Not stated in the judgment (appeal from Machakos CMCC No. 539 of 2015). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/2169/eng@2023-09-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.