The High Court in Kisumu has awarded a passenger Sh645,974 in damages following a partially successful defence of his injury claim against Super Metro Limited.
The figure follows an appeal by the bus company that challenged the quantum of damages and the medical evidence tendered by the claimant.
Justice Alfred Mabeya partly allowed the civil appeal, which arose from a January 29, 2024, crash along the Awasi–Ahero road.
Court documents show that Clovins Ndayikengurutse, a fare-paying passenger, had sued Super Metro Limited after the vehicle he was travelling in collided with another vehicle.
He alleged that he sustained injuries that required treatment and incurred medical expenses as a result.
"He suffered bruises to the forehead, knee joint, elbow joint, and a fracture of the left clavicle. He produced a Police Abstract and receipts for medication. He underwent surgery on the chest in Nairobi," the judgment reads.
In the trial court, Ndayikengurutse was awarded Sh650,000 in general damages and Sh146,074 in special damages, plus costs and interest totalling Sh796,074.
Super Metro, through a memorandum of appeal, asked the High Court to overturn the award.
It argued that the general damages were excessive, the special damages were not proved, and that the alleged fracture was not connected to the accident because it appeared only in later medical reports.
Justice Mabeya, sitting as a first appellate court, re-evaluated the evidence afresh.
On special damages, he found that the passenger had specifically pleaded Sh156,474 and produced invoices and receipts totalling Sh145,974.
Although one invoice of Sh130,000 lacked a receipt, there was no evidence contradicting that the treatment took place.
Citing case law, the judge held that an invoice can show a financial obligation where unchallenged and upheld the special damages at Sh145,974.
On the disputed clavicle fracture, the court reconstructed the patient’s treatment chronology.
The problem arose when, contrary to the referral request for a left-shoulder X-ray, a different examination was carried out instead.
As a result, the fracture was not detected at that time. The respondent, as a patient, had no control over the tests performed
"That is why there was no discovery of the fracture. The respondent had no control over where the X-ray was to be undertaken," Justice Mabeya further noted.
As a layperson who had entrusted himself to medical professionals, the judge noted that the respondent had no control over the procedures carried out.
It was only after persistent pain that he sought further treatment at another facility, where an X-ray revealed the fracture. The judge therefore rejected the appellant’s suggestion that the injury was unrelated
However, after comparing recent High Court decisions involving similar injuries, Justice Mabeya found the original Sh650,000 general damages “inordinately high” and substituted it with Sh500,000.
Because the passenger had not cross-appealed on his plea for Sh200,000 future medical expenses, the judge declined to consider it.
In the result, the High Court ordered Super Metro Limited to pay the passenger a total of Sh645,974, Sh500,000 in general damages plus Sh145,974 in special damages — together with interest.
Each party was ordered to bear its own costs of the appeal.
