Judgment[1986] KECA 97
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
…The appellant received a sum of Shs 38,000 and so a claim on negligence was within his knowledge; the appellant knew he had been injured and that his employer should have supplied facilities for safety.…
…were attributable to that negligence, nuisance or breach of duty, or the extent to which any of those personal injuries were so attributable. (2) For the purpose of sections 27, 28 and 29 of this Act, any of the material…
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
…He expressly found that the respondent was not guilty of any contributory negligence.…
…He thus answered in specle the only allegation of negligence which were really particular to this case, as opposed to the generalities to which I have just referred.…
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
…The plaintiff based his claim on the 1st defendant’s negligence for which the 2nd defendant firm is vicariously responsible. The defendants, for their part denied negligence.…
…I think the lst defendant was negligent and that his negligence was the substantial cause of the accident. I use the word “substantial” advisedly because, I cannot acquit the plaintiff of all blame.…
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
…If so, the defendant could have joined the rider as a party to claim contributory negligence and indemnity. However, he has not done so.…
…free education and maintenance (4) Loss of salary as a cadet (5) Maintenance and education by his father Mr Mohamed submits that these are the losses which plaintiff has suffered as a direct consequence of the defendant’s negligence…
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Appeal
…Mr Otieno for the plaintiff stressed that even if the 2nd defendant’s account as to the cause of accident is accepted it still displayed a certain amount of negligence on his part.…
…After considering the cause of accident from all its angles in my view there was no negligence at all on the part of the 2nd defendant. The accident had been made inevitable by the action of the plaintiff herself.…