Sugar Corporation of Uganda Ltd and Another vs Milly Masembe (Civil Appeal No 44 of 1997) [1998] UGCA 9 (23 November 1998)

{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f199\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;} {\f200\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f202\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f203\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f204\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);} {\f205\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f206\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f207\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255; \red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0; \red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 \snext0 \styrsid3897654 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{ \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext15 \styrsid3897654 Normal (Web);}{\s16\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar \tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext16 \styrsid3621464 footer;}{\*\cs17 \additive \sbasedon10 \styrsid3621464 page number;}} {\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}{\*\pgptbl {\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid12292\rsid263824\rsid405028\rsid460387\rsid483953\rsid532800\rsid656068\rsid726011\rsid853000\rsid1193121\rsid1212221\rsid1263153\rsid1328200 \rsid1589256\rsid1597739\rsid1769736\rsid1979034\rsid1985355\rsid2056164\rsid2654096\rsid2753621\rsid2833257\rsid2891500\rsid3035935\rsid3436095\rsid3621464\rsid3891542\rsid3897654\rsid4009546\rsid4013346\rsid4154319\rsid4606034\rsid4615111\rsid4804988 \rsid4812412\rsid4816222\rsid4994645\rsid5249105\rsid5257113\rsid5338672\rsid5393925\rsid5529574\rsid5578182\rsid5599792\rsid5925591\rsid6168920\rsid6227913\rsid6237539\rsid6298534\rsid6761646\rsid6774612\rsid6904975\rsid7235957\rsid7297041\rsid7555992 \rsid7699176\rsid7878088\rsid8001677\rsid8389903\rsid8538801\rsid8545157\rsid8612580\rsid8857076\rsid9138396\rsid9583136\rsid9729420\rsid10119127\rsid10384870\rsid10438333\rsid10517635\rsid10564061\rsid10692163\rsid10693564\rsid10703749\rsid10825639 \rsid10975670\rsid11025202\rsid11078177\rsid11350863\rsid11563786\rsid11930287\rsid12526284\rsid12718503\rsid12730652\rsid12742138\rsid12982377\rsid13255604\rsid13435762\rsid13466614\rsid13512610\rsid13720995\rsid13792302\rsid13914955\rsid14043846 \rsid14428627\rsid14626845\rsid14839716\rsid14942689\rsid15011044\rsid15430543\rsid15688051\rsid15798275\rsid15818385\rsid15882927\rsid15952220\rsid16061834\rsid16084859\rsid16150457\rsid16350938\rsid16396350\rsid16581033\rsid16673595}{\*\generator Micros oft Word 11.0.5604;}{\info{\title I }{\author Wor. Jessica chemeri}{\operator Wor. Jessica chemeri}{\creatim\yr2008\mo8\dy4\hr16\min37}{\revtim\yr2008\mo9\dy12\hr11\min12}{\version14}{\edmins70}{\nofpages8}{\nofwords2212}{\nofchars12615}{\nofcharsws14798} {\vern24689}}\widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\hyphcaps0\formshade\horzdoc\dgmargin\dghspace180\dgvspace180\dghorigin1800\dgvorigin1440\dghshow1\dgvshow1 \jexpand\viewkind1\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\splytwnine\ftnlytwnine\htmautsp\nolnhtadjtbl\useltbaln\alntblind\lytcalctblwd\lyttblrtgr\lnbrkrule\nobrkwrptbl\snaptogridincell\allowfieldendsel\wrppunct \asianbrkrule\rsidroot3897654\newtblstyruls\nogrowautofit \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\insrsid3621464 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\insrsid3621464 \chftnsepc \par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\insrsid3621464 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\insrsid3621464 \chftnsepc \par }}\sectd \linex0\endnhere\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sftnbj {\footer \pard\plain \s16\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\pvpara\phmrg\posxr\posy0\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid405028 \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\field{\*\fldinst {\cs17\insrsid3621464 PAGE }}{\fldrslt {\cs17\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid6904975 1}}}{\cs17\insrsid3621464 \par }\pard \s16\ql \li0\ri360\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin360\lin0\itap0\pararsid3621464 {\insrsid3621464 \par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}} {\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8 \pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1 \widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3621464 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\insrsid3621464\charrsid3621464 }{\ul\insrsid3621464 }{ \b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 THE REP}{\b\ul\insrsid3621464\charrsid3621464 UBLI}{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 C}{\b\ul\insrsid3621464\charrsid3621464 }{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 OF UGANDA}{\b\ul\insrsid3621464\charrsid3621464 }{\ul\insrsid3621464 \line }{\b\insrsid3621464\charrsid3621464 }{\b\ul\insrsid3621464\charrsid3621464 IN TH}{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 E COURT OF APPEAL}{\b\i\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 }{\b\ul\insrsid3621464\charrsid3621464 OF UGAND}{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 A \line }{\b\insrsid3621464\charrsid3621464 }{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 HOLDEN }{\b\ul\insrsid3621464\charrsid3621464 AT}{\b\i\ul\insrsid3621464\charrsid3621464 }{ \b\ul\insrsid3621464\charrsid3621464 KAMPALA \par }{\i\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\b\ul\insrsid3621464\charrsid13792302 CORAM}{\b\insrsid3621464\charrsid13792302 }{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid13792302 HON. MR. JUSTICE S. T. MANYINDO, DCJ; \line }{\b\insrsid3621464\charrsid13792302 }{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid13792302 HON. MR.}{\b\i\insrsid3897654\charrsid13792302 }{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid13792302 JUSTICE G. M. OKELLO, J. A.; }{\b\insrsid3621464\charrsid13792302 }{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid13792302 AND \line }{\b\insrsid3621464\charrsid13792302 }{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid13792302 HON. MR. JUSTICE S. G. ENGWAU, J. A}{\b\insrsid3621464\charrsid13792302 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 . }{\insrsid3621464 }{\b\ul\insrsid3621464\charrsid3621464 CIVIL APPEAL NO.44 OF 1997}{\b\ul\insrsid15011044 \par }{\b\insrsid15011044\charrsid15011044 }{\b\ul\insrsid15011044 BETWEEN}{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\insrsid3621464 [1) SUGA}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 R CORPORATION OF UGANDA LTD.) : : : : : : : : : }{\insrsid3621464 :APPFLLANTS \line [2) K}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 AGIRI RICH}{\insrsid3621464 ARD}{\insrsid15011044 \par AND}{\i\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\insrsid15011044 MILL}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 Y M}{\insrsid15011044 ASEMB}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 E: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : }{\insrsid15011044 :RESPO}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 NDENT \line }{\i\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 (Appeal from the d}{\i\insrsid15011044 ecision of the High Court (C. M. Kato as he the}{ \i\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 n was) dated 25th }{\i\insrsid15011044 August }{\i\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 1997 in Hi}{\i\insrsid15011044 gh Court Civil Suit No. 646 of }{\i\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 1995).}{\insrsid2056164 \par }{\i\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\b\ul\insrsid2056164\charrsid2056164 JUDGEMENT OF G. M. OKELLO. J. A}{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid2056164 \line }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid2056164 This is }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 an appeal against the dec }{\insrsid2056164 ision of High Court (C. M. Kato}{\i\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 }{\insrsid2056164 as he then was) da}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 te}{\insrsid2056164 d 25th August 1997 in High Court Civil }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 Suit No. 646 of 1995.}{\insrsid2056164 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 The essential facts giving rise to the appeal are that on 28/12/93, the 1st appellant\rquote s Trail}{\insrsid2056164 er drawn Tractor driver by the }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 2nd appellant was transporting sugar canes along Mukono/Jinja road when on reaching opposite Namagunga Secondary School it suddenly broke down covering part of its side of the road. A minibus in which the respondent, a business woman, was travelling at night from Kampala towards Jinja hit the back of the stationary Tractor. She sustained injuries and was rushed to Kawolo Hos pital for treatment. She was hospitalised for two months and after discharge, she remained on crutches for a further three months. Her personal properties like cash of Kenya \line Shillings 100,000/= and 20 Films worth 600,000/= were lost in the accident. }{\insrsid2056164 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 The trial Judge found the driver of the tractor 80% to blame for ( the accident because he left the b}{\insrsid1193121 roken down Tractor on the road }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 at night unguarded, unlit and without any warning that it was broken down. He found that the driver of the minibus was 20% to blame for his failure to see the stationary Tractor and to avoid the accident. The driver of the minib}{\insrsid1193121 us was neither party to the }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 suit nor a witness therein. The respondent did not want to go against him. The trial judge entered judgment for the respondent a}{\insrsid1193121 nd made the following awards; \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\insrsid1193121 [1] 1,600,000/= equivalent of KShs 100,000/}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 = lost by the respondent in the \line }{\insrsid2654096 }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 accident. \line [2}{ \insrsid1193121\charrsid3621464 ]}{\insrsid1193121 }{\insrsid1193121\charrsid3621464 600,000}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 /= value of 20 Films lost by the }{\insrsid1193121 respondent in the accident. \line [3]}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 407,000}{\insrsid1193121 /= costs of Medical Treatment }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 incurred by the respondent as a r}{\insrsid1193121 esult \line }{\insrsid2654096 }{\insrsid1193121 of the accident. \line [4] 3,0}{\insrsid2654096 0}{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 0,000/= Loss of earnings by the respondent for two months }{\insrsid2654096 when she was \line hospitalised. \line [5]}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 7,000,00}{\insrsid2654096 0/= General Damages for }{\insrsid13792302 pain }{\insrsid13792302\charrsid3621464 and}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 injuries suffered by the respondent \line }{\insrsid2654096 }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 as a result of the accident. \line [6] In}{\insrsid2654096 terest of 10% per annum on the }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 decretal amount from the date of \line judgment till payment in full. \line Hence this appeal. }{\insrsid6904975 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 There are f}{\insrsid2654096 our grounds of appeal namely:}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\insrsid2654096 [1] }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 The learned trial Judge erred in his evaluation of the evidence and came to \line }{\insrsid2654096 }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 wrong findings. \line [21 The learned trial Judge erred in his apportionment of liability between the appellants}{ \insrsid2654096 and the driver of Motor }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 Vehicle}{\insrsid2654096 Reg. No. UPS 847 in which the }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 respondent was }{\insrsid6904975\charrsid3621464 traveling}{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 . \line [31 The tr}{\insrsid6237539 ial Judge erred in holding the }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 appellants responsible for the \line allegedly lost property. \line [4] The trial Judge erred in his assessment in respect of loss of }{\insrsid6237539 earnings by the \line respondent. \line }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 Alternatively: }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line [51 The}{\insrsid6237539 trial Judge erred by awarding }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 general damages which were in the \line circumstances of the case excessive. \line There was also a cross appeal by the respondent. It was based on six grounds but only the following three were argued: \'93[1 The learn}{\insrsid6237539 ed trial Judge having found }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 as }{\insrsid6237539 a fact and held that the first }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 defend}{\insrsid6237539 ant was vicariously liable for }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 the negligent act of the second \line de}{\insrsid6237539 fendant, erred in law to order }{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 that the two defendants should pay \line the }{\insrsid6237539 decreted (sic) amount in equal }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 shares. \line }{\insrsid6237539 [}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 4] The learned trial Judge erred in law and on the facts placed before him when he awarded the plaintiff a paltry Shs. 3,000,000}{\insrsid6237539 /}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 = (three million) as loss of earnings. \line }{\insrsid6237539 [5]}{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 The learned Judge exercised wrong principles and as such came to a wrong conclusion when he warded (sic) interest of 10% per annum from the date}{\insrsid6237539 of Judgment till payment in }{ \insrsid6237539\charrsid3621464 full}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 .\'94 \line The other grounds were abandoned. Counsel for the parties submitted written arguments on the cross appeal. \line On the }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid12982377 main appeal}{ \i\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 , }{\insrsid12982377 the four grounds 1-4 were argued together}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 . The appellant\rquote s main criticism against the trial Judge\rquote s judgm}{\insrsid8612580 e}{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 nt was on the Judge\rquote s evaluation of the evidence on record. Mr. Serwanga, learned counsel for the appellant, contended that the trial Judge did not properly evaluate the evidence on record }{\insrsid8612580 and }{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 that as a result he came to the wrong conclusion that the second appellant was mostly to blame for the accident. The trial Judge\rquote s reason for that conclusion was that the second appellant abandoned the broken down Tractor on the high way at night unattended to, unlit and without any warning that }{\insrsid8612580 it was broken down. Learned.}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 Counsel submitted that if the trial Judge had properly evaluated the evidence before him, he would have found from the evidence of Richard Kageru (}{\insrsid8612580 P}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 W1), and Charles Lukwago (}{\insrsid8612580 P}{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 W4) that the second appellant was not at all responsible for the accident. He had put branches }{\insrsid8612580\charrsid3621464 of}{\insrsid8612580 trees on the road in front }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 and at the rear of the stationary Tractor as a warning sign to other road users. He also }{\insrsid8612580\charrsid3621464 submitted}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 that the reflectors on the rear of the Trac tor Trailer were not obstructed by sugar canes as Benjamin Namanya (PW3) and Juventine Apunyo (PW4) testified. In Counsel\rquote s view, the testimonies of DW1 and DW4 were corroborated by Exh Dl, the photographs of the scene of the accident \par In response, Mr. Kiapi, learned Counsel for the respondent, submitted that the trial Judge\rquote s findings were supported by the evidence of PW3 and PW4 both of whom testified that the broken down Tractor was abandoned on the highway at night, unlit and \line without any warning that it was broken down}{\insrsid726011 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 The trial Judge dealt with this issue in his judgment as follows: - \line \lquote The eviden}{\insrsid726011 ce outlined by the Plaintiff\rquote s }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 side clearly s}{\insrsid726011 hows that the vehicle (Tractor }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 and its trail}{\insrsid726011 er) were abandoned on the road }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 and at the tim}{\insrsid726011 e of the accident there was }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 nothing to}{\insrsid726011 indicate that the vehicle had }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 broken down.}{\insrsid726011 I do not believe the story as }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 told by the d}{\insrsid726011 river and his turn-boy that at }{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 the time }{\insrsid726011 o the accident the vehicle had }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 signs to show}{\insrsid726011 that it had broken down so as }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 to warn other}{\insrsid726011 ro ad users about the danger }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 ahead}{\insrsid726011 . I accept the evidence of the }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 Plaintiff a}{\insrsid726011 nd her witnesses to the effect }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 that the vehi}{ \insrsid726011 cle was left on the load unlit }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 and unat}{\insrsid726011 tended to this leaving no sign }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 warning other }{\insrsid726011 road users of the existence of }{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 the tractor on the road. The Police of}{\insrsid726011 ficer }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 Mr. Benjam}{\insrsid726011 in Namanya who saw the vehicle }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 when going t}{\insrsid726011 o Mukono and who saw it on his }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 way back at the time when the accident \line happened was an}{\insrsid726011 independent witness and had }{\insrsid726011\charrsid3621464 no}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 reason for telling this Court a lie when \line he said that t}{\insrsid726011 here were no signs to indicate }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 that it had br}{\insrsid726011 oken down, in the same way the }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 evidence}{ \insrsid726011 of his driver Apunyo also was }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 evidence of an independent witness. He \line agreed also }{\insrsid726011 that the vehicle was parked on }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 the road without anything to show that it \line had broken down and there were no reflectors on eit}{\insrsid8389903 her the Tractor or its Trailer. \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line I also agree with Apunyo\rquote s evidence that the vehicle was dangerously parked almost in the middle of the road so that if anybody had to by pass it, he had to use the lane for the vehicle facing the opposite direction. This piece of e}{\insrsid8389903 vidence is supported by the }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 evidence of the second defendant who said that the Tractor stopped abruptly and he left it at the place where he was driving it which means it was on the d}{\insrsid8389903 riving lane not of}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 f the road. There w as no evidence from the defence side to show that after the vehicle had broken down it was pushed aside in order to clear the road for other traffic. The pictures Ex. Dl of the photograph (sic) taken by DW2 S. Ochieng }{\insrsid8389903\charrsid3621464 d}{ \insrsid8389903 o }{\insrsid8389903\charrsid3621464 not}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 show any object lying on the road showing that some branches had been placed on the road. The same pictures also d}{\insrsid4009546 o clearly show sugar canes dangl} {\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 ing o}{\insrsid4009546 n the side of the Trailer No. U}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 WV 469.}{\insrsid4009546 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 In these circumstances I find that Kagiri was negligent when he left both the Tractor and its Trailer parked on the road without being guarded }{\insrsid4009546 and without any sign that it }{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 had broken down.\'94 \line Clearly, the trial Judge based his finding that the second appellant was negligent on the evidence of }{\insrsid4009546\charrsid3621464 Benjamin}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 Namanya (PW3) and Apunyo Juventine (PW4) whom he described as independent witnesses. \line As was stated by Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa in }{\b\ul\insrsid4009546\charrsid4009546 SELLE AND }{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid4009546 ANOTHER VS ASSOCIATED MOTOR BOAT }{\b\ul\insrsid4009546\charrsid4009546 COMPANY LTD AND ANOTHER (1968) }{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid4009546 EA 123 AT}{\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 }{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid4009546 P.126}{ \ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\insrsid4009546 }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \'93An appeal to this }{\insrsid4009546 Court from a trial by the }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 High Court is by way of a retrial.\'94 }{\insrsid4009546 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 The principles upon which this Court acts in such an appeal was spelt out in }{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid4009546 SELLE AND ANOTHER (supra}{\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 ) }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 as follows}{\insrsid4009546 : \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \'93...the principles upon which this Court acts in such an appeal is well settled. Briefly put, they are that this Court must reconsider the evidence, evaluate it itself and draw its own}{\insrsid4009546 }{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 conclusions though it should always bear in mind that it has neither seen nor heard the witnesses and should make due allowance in this regard. In }{\insrsid4009546 particular, this Court is not bound}{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 necessarily to follow the trial Judge\rquote s findings of facts if it appears either that he has clearly failed on some points to take account of particular circumstances or probabilities materially to estimate the evidence or if the impression based on the }{\insrsid4009546\charrsid3621464 demeanor}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 of a witness is inconsistent with the evidence in the case generally (}{\b\insrsid4009546\charrsid4009546 Abdul}{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid4009546 }{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid4009546 Hameed Saif Vs Au Mohamed Sholan}{\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 }{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid4009546 [1955] 22 ECA 270}{\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 ),\'94 }{\insrsid4009546 \line }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line Rule 29 (1) (a) of the Court of Appeal Rules Directions, 1996, Legal Notice No. 11 of 1996 reinforces the above principles when it empowers this Court to reappraise the evidence on record and to draw inference of fact. The relevant rule says that:}{ \insrsid4009546 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \'93On any appe}{\insrsid4009546 al from a decision of the High }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 Court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, the Court may, \line (a}{\insrsid4009546 ) re -appraise the evidence and }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 draw inference of fact, \line and \line (b)}{\insrsid4009546 \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85.\rquote \rquote }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line This Court therefore has jurisdiction to review the evidence to determine whether or not the conclus}{\insrsid4009546 ions of the trial Judge can }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 be supported. If no}{\insrsid4009546 t, to draw its own inference of }{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 fact.}{\insrsid4009546 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 In the instant case, the evidence of DW1 and DW4 gives the opposite version to that of PW3 and PW4 as to the situation at the scene of the accident. The evidence of DW1 and DW4 show that: - \line }{\insrsid4009546 [1]}{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 The T}{\insrsid4009546 ractor stopped suddenly and it }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 remained on the road where it was being \line drive}{\insrsid4009546 n. The Tractor was pulling }{\insrsid13792302 a }{ \insrsid6904975\charrsid3621464 Trailer}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 carrying sugar canes. \line [2] The Tractor/}{\insrsid6904975\charrsid3621464 Trailer}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 was on the left hand side of the road as you go to \line Jinja. \line [3] Tree branches were placed in front and at the rear of the place where t}{\insrsid4009546 he \line Tractor had broken down. \line }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 [4] The reflectors were on the }{\insrsid6904975 Traile}{ \insrsid6904975\charrsid3621464 r}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 and Tractor. }{\insrsid4009546 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 [5] The turn-boy (DW4) was left to guard the vehicle. \line \line The trial Judge did not believe the above evidence. He also did not wholly believe the photographs of the scene of the accident Ex. D1. }{\insrsid10692163 Firstly, Ex. D1 (No.39) shows ob}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 jects (Tree branches) on the road. Secondly, Ex. Dl (No. 28 and 39) both show the position of the Tractor/Trailer as being on the left hand side of the road as you face Jinja side. It partially covered that side of the road. It was not dangerously parked almost in the middle of the road as the trial Judge found. Thirdly, Ex. D1 (No.22) shows the rear reflectors on the Trailer. From this photograph,}{\insrsid10692163 the }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 dangling sugar canes did not obstruct the reflectors on the rear of th e Trailer. They can be seen clearly. The photographs (Ex. Dl) therefore corroborated the evidence of DW1 and DW4 in material particulars. Photographs are more graphic evidence and in this case depicted more accurately and reliably the situation at the scen e of the accident.}{\insrsid10692163 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 In view of the above, I am unable to agree with the trial Judge\rquote s findings of fact regarding the situation at the scene of the accident and consequently, the blamew}{\insrsid10692163 orthiness for the accident. }{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 It is plain from the above evidence that the second appellant was driving the Trailer - pulling Tractor diligently on the far left hand side of the road when it suddenly broke down. It is also plain that warning signs }{ \insrsid10692163 in the form }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 of tree branches were placed on the road in front and at the rea}{\insrsid10692163 r of the stationary vehicle. Fur}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 ther, the reflectors on the rear of the }{ \insrsid6904975\charrsid3621464 trailer}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 were clearly visible. These were sufficient warnings to any vehicle or other road users approaching the stationary Tractor.}{\insrsid10692163 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line For these reasons, }{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 I }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 am unable to agree with Mr. Kiapi that the 30 learned trial Judge properly e}{\insrsid10692163 valuated the evidence that was }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 before him. If he did, he would have found as a fact that the second appellant, who was the driver of the Tractor, had done all that was expected of him in the circumstances. He would have also found that it was the driver of the minibus Reg. No. UPS 847 who hit the back of the stationary Tractor Trailer, that drove without any proper look out to avoid the accident. If he had driven with a proper lookout, with all those warning s igns, then he would have seen the trailer and avoided hitting it. \line This ground was therefore well taken. In view of that finding, I see no usefulness in considering the other grounds and the cross appeal. \line In the result, I would allow the appeal, set aside the judgment and orders of the lower Court. I would substitute it with an order for a judgment dismissing the }{\insrsid10692163 respondent\rquote s suit with costs}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 here and in the Court below. \line Dated at Kampala this}{\insrsid10692163 24}{\super\insrsid10692163\charrsid10692163 th}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 day of }{\insrsid6904975 November }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 1998. \line \line }{ \b\insrsid3897654\charrsid10692163 G. M. }{\b\insrsid10692163\charrsid10692163 OKELLO \line JUSTICE OF APPEAL}{\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line \line }{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid6904975 J}{ \b\ul\insrsid10692163\charrsid6904975 UDGEME}{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid6904975 NT }{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid6904975 OF }{\b\ul\insrsid6904975\charrsid6904975 MANYTND}{\b\ul\insrsid10692163\charrsid6904975 O. D}{ \b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid6904975 C. J }{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid6904975 \line }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 I read the judgment of Okello J}{\insrsid10692163 .}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 A in draft. I agree that this appeal ought to be allowed. All the evidence shows that the driver of the Minibus and not the second appellant was wholly to blame for the accident. \line Contrary to the allegation in the respondent\rquote s plaint, the second appellant did not carelessly or negligently park the tractor \'93in the road\'94. The tractor broke down suddenly and remained there. From the photographs of}{\insrsid10692163 t}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 he scene of accident there was plenty of room for other vehicles to pass. The allegations that the tractor did not bear reflectors and that no other warning signs were displayed on the road were disproved by the evidence led by the appellants. It follows that the appellants were wrongly blamed for t he accident. The respondent would have done well to sue the driver of the Minibus.}{\insrsid10692163 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 As Engwau, JA also agrees the appeal is allowe}{\insrsid10692163 d in terms proposed by Okello J. A}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 . \line }{\insrsid10692163 Dated at Kampala this 24}{ \super\insrsid10692163\charrsid10692163 th}{\insrsid10692163 day of Nov}{\insrsid16396350 ember}{\insrsid10692163 1998 \par }{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid10692163 S. T. MANYINDO}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 DEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \par }{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 JUDGMENT OF }{\b\ul\insrsid16396350\charrsid16396350 ENGWAU}{\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 , }{\b\ul\insrsid16396350 J. A}{\b\ul\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 . }{ \b\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 I have had the benefit of reading the judgment of Okello, J. A. in draft and I entirely agree with it. }{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 I would allow this appeal with the terms proposed by Okello, }{\insrsid16396350 \par }{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 Dated at Kampala this...2}{\insrsid16396350 4}{\super\insrsid16396350\charrsid16396350 th}{\insrsid16396350 .}{\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 day}{\insrsid16396350 of November}{\insrsid6904975 1998}{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line \line }{\insrsid16396350 }{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 S. G. }{\b\insrsid16396350 ENGWAU}{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \line }{\b\insrsid16396350 JUSTICE OF APPEAL}{\b\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 . }{ \insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3621464 \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\lang1033\langfe1033\langnp1033\insrsid3897654\charrsid3621464 \par }{\insrsid10825639\charrsid3621464 \par }}