Electricity distributor Kenya Power has been ordered to pay more than Sh50 million as compensation to the proprietors of a Malindi hotel razed down by a fire caused by a power line.
Justice Stephen Githinji, sitting at the High Court in Malindi, ordered the company to pay Sh40 million as compensation for loss and damages and 93,600 euros (Sh.13.3 million) as an award for loss of business to Mr Francis Kenga and his wife Ivan Renne.
The judge on August 1 issued a declaration that Kenya Power breached its statutory duties under the provisions of the Energy Act causing loss and damage to Mr Kenga and Ms Renne thus it was under duty to compensate them.
The court also ruled that there was no reliable evidence by Kenya Power that the plaintiffs’ premises were on the way leave. This, it noted, was the reason why Kenya Power’s witnesses admitted that it would not have supplied electricity to the couple’s premises if they had not complied with the company's regulations in respect of proximity to way leave.
“I find that the plaintiffs have proved the defendant’s negligence due to the defendant’s failure to maintain their power conductor’s safety, causing their crushing and production of sparks that fell on makuti leading to the fire outbreak,” ruled Justice Githinji. Justice Githinji further ruled that as it had already been established that the power lines were near the plaintiffs’ premises thus the proximity between the action complained against and the damage suffered.
“The defendant bore a duty of care to the plaintiffs which was breached,” ruled Justice Githinji adding that Kenya Power was wholly liable for the fire outbreak that led to the loss and damage.
He further ruled that the plaintiffs’ claim for negligence is founded on Kenya Power’s failure to maintain a safe system and repair its power lines.
“The defendant being the monopolistic supplier of electricity in the country has a duty to ensure that supply is well maintained and in safe condition,” said Justice Githinji.
The court also noted that Kenya Power’s witnesses’ admitted that the company’s personnel would visit the premises monthly for meter readings thus if there had been a breach of the way leave the couple would have been informed.
