Otieno v Hassan & 2 others (Civil Case E081 of 2025) [2025] SCC 22 (KLR)

The respondents filed no witness statements, leaving only the claimant's narration that his vehicle rammed the rear of another truck going the same direction. The driver ought to have braked, swerved or kept a safe distance. The police abstract blamed the respondent. A passenger cannot contribute to the accident. Citing Masembe v Sugar Corporation and Boniface Waiti, the court held the driver 100% liable with the other respondents vicariously liable.

The claimant sustained a fracture of the mid shaft ulna with minimal displacement, blunt trauma to the jaw, knee and ankle, classified as grievous harm in the P3 form. Following the principle that comparable injuries attract comparable awards, the court found Pestony (award reduced to Kshs.800,000 for a single healed femur fracture) comparable and awarded Kshs.600,000, factoring in the 7% disability.

The court reiterated that special damages must be specifically pleaded and proved. On a review of the receipts in support, it found they had been proved to the required standard and allowed special damages inclusive of physiotherapy and medication costs.

The claimant having succeeded in the claim, the court applied the principle that costs follow the event and awarded costs of the claim to the claimant, together with interest from the date of judgment until payment in full.