Muwanga v Sterling Civil Engineering (U) Limited (Civil Appeal 20 of 1993)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
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
An appellate court will not normally interfere with a trial court's assessment of damages unless the judge proceeded on a wrong principle or made a wholly erroneous estimate producing an award that is too high or too low. The appellant, injured in a motor accident, had largely healed, had no proven permanent disability, retained his employment (on lighter duties) with no proven loss of income, and showed no psychological injury. He failed to demonstrate any error in principle in the trial judge's award of Shs. 800,000 general damages. The Court therefore declined to disturb the award and dismissed the appeal on quantum with costs to the respondent.
Outcome
Appeal against quantum of damages dismissed; the trial court's award of Shs. 800,000 general damages was upheld.
Facts
On 8 August 1988 at Kawolo, Mukono District, the respondent's lorry, driven by its driver Senyonjo, collided with a car in which the appellant was travelling. Three occupants of the car died. The appellant, aged 36 and employed as a driver with Bugisu Coffee Factory, sustained a simple fracture of the right femur, a dislocation of the right leg, and multiple cut wounds to the cheek, right hand, neck, calf and forehead, with persistent pain in the right leg, shoulder and chest. Liability was admitted by the respondent following its admission in an earlier test suit arising from the same accident. The appellant sued for general and special damages. The trial judge awarded Shs. 800,000 general damages for pain and loss of amenities and Shs. 3,000 special damages, rejecting an unproved claim of Shs. 200,000 for medical expenses. The injuries had healed fairly well, with no assessed permanent disability; the appellant kept his job on lighter duties with no proven loss of income or psychological injury.
Issues
- Whether the trial judge erred in principle in assessing the appellant's general damages, so as to entitle the appellate court to interfere with the award.
- Whether the award of Shs. 800,000 general damages was inordinately low given the appellant's injuries, pain and suffering.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Costs of the appeal awarded to the respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Cases cited (7)
- Davies v Powell [1942] 1 All E.R. 657
- Flint v Lovell [1935] 1 K.B. 354
- Lukoo v Motoso [1952] 70 EACA 50
- Notia v ... [1905] 22 EACA 10 (OCR-garbled)
- Si...aab v Linoh [1955] EACA 127 at 129 (OCR-garbled)
- Sulaiti Mutebi v Uganda Consolidated ... H.C.C.S. No. 777
- Electricity injury case (Supreme Court) — appellant reduced to incapacity; trial award of Shs. 9 million doubled on appeal (case name not legible in source)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.