Selvano Asaba and Another vs Virginia Balisanga (Civil Appeal No 48 of 1997)
The full judgment
Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions — always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal challenging the quantum of general damages awarded to the widow of a man killed in a motor accident. The court held the trial judge correctly adopted a multiplier of seven years based on a working-life expectancy of 55 years, properly estimated the deceased's monthly contribution to his family by reference to his total earnings rather than the local cost of living, and rightly declined to deduct funeral expenses, which were in the nature of a charitable gift and were never claimed. An appellate court will only interfere with damages where the trial judge applied a wrong principle or the award is so excessive or low as to cause a miscarriage of justice.
Facts
Simon Balisanga was a fare-paying passenger in a vehicle owned by the first appellant and driven by the second appellant in the course of employment. On 14 April 1996 he was severely injured in a motor accident caused by the second appellant's negligence and later died. Liability was admitted; only quantum was in dispute. The deceased was 48 years old, employed as a foreman at Hima Cement Factory earning about Shs.150,000 per month, with additional income of Shs.130,000 from a partnership cement business and about Shs.100,000 from a food stall run by his widow on his capital. His widow, suing for herself and as administratrix, was awarded Shs.6,938,000 as general damages by the High Court. The trial judge estimated family living expenses at Shs.150,000 per month and applied a multiplier of seven years reflecting a working-life expectancy of 55 years. The appellants contended the award was excessive, urging a lower multiplier, a lower assumed expenditure given the rural cost of living, and deduction of Shs.290,000 in funeral expenses they had paid.
Issues
- Whether the trial judge adopted an erroneous multiplier in assessing damages for the dependant's loss following the deceased's death.
- Whether the trial judge erred in estimating the deceased's monthly expenditure on the family.
- Whether the funeral expenses paid by the appellants should be deducted from the award.
- Whether the award of general damages was so high as to justify appellate interference.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Costs of the appeal and in the High Court awarded to the respondent.
Key headnotes
Cases cited (7)
- Christopher Kiggundu and Another v UTC (1975) Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1993)
- B.A.T. 1984 (U) Limited v Selestino Mushongore (Civil Appeal No. 26 of 1994)
- Flint v Lovell 50 TLR 127
- Associated Architects v Christine Nazziwa (Civil Appeal No. 1 of 1981)
- Redpath v Belfast & County Down Rly Co (1947) NI 167
- Peacock v Amusement Equipment Co Ltd [1954] 2 QB 347
- Browning v The War Office and Another [1963] 1 QB 750