Piece by: ANNETTE WAMBULWA

13 November 2022

• Justice Lagat Korir dismissed the appeal and upheld the magistrate's decision to award Kipyegon’s family Sh2.1 million.

• It is alleged that on May 22, 2013, the late Kipyegon was riding his motorcycle on the Bomet – Narok road at Longisa when he was hit by a Probox registered in Ganda’s name.

The family of a Bomet businessman Onesmus Kipyegon killed by a motorist ten years ago has been awarded Sh2.1 million by the high court.

In the case, Gregory Ochieng Ganda, the owner of the vehicle that hit and killed Kipyegon, had appealed the magistrate’s decision that ordered him to pay the family Sh2.1 million, arguing that it was excessive.

However, Justice Lagat Korir dismissed the appeal and upheld the magistrate's decision to award Kipyegon’s family Sh2.1 million.

It is alleged that on May 22, 2013, the late Kipyegon was riding his motorcycle on the Bomet – Narok road at Longisa when he was hit by a Probox registered in Ganda’s name.

He died on the spot and his family moved to court where Ganda was given 80 per cent liability and the deceased 20 per cent liability for the accident.

Judge Korir, while awarding the family, agreed with the deceased son that if his father remained in good health then it would have been expected that he could have worked for another ten to twelve years.

The judge broke down the award as follows: for pain and suffering Sh20,000, Loss of expectation of life- Sh100,000, Loss of dependency Sh2.4 Million and special damages Sh176,000.

However, Sh504,000 was deducted from the above being the 20 per cent liability on the side of their father in the accident.

He noted that the dependants of the late Kipyegon who was aged 58 at the time of his death are aged between 20 and 55 except two of his grandchildren.

His son, in submissions to the court, had argued that his father would have been expected to work until he was 70 years old so they deserved the award of dependency.

The court further ruled that the deceased’s life expectancy was diminished by the injuries he sustained in the accident and therefore his dependants were entitled to be compensated.

Justice Korir ruled that Ganda never controverted the evidence by the family that said the deceased died on the spot.

The court had been told that the businessman was in the hospitality industry and he owned a motorcycle which he also used to generate income.

The family submitted that the deceased had 11 dependants and it was reasonable to expect that he would spend a large chunk of his income of Sh150,000 on his dependants.

However, in his case, Ganda argued that if any accident happened, it was caused solely by the negligence of the deceased.