Woman loses case on contaminated Fanta soda
A commercial court has set aside a decision that awarded a woman Sh150,000 after finding a straw in a sealed bottle of soda.
Justice David Majanja said Catherine Wanjiru failed to prove she was entitled to the money awarded to her in the form of general damages by trial Magistrate D.W. Mburu.
Mburu in December 2017, held that Nairobi bottlers was liable for selling a defective product and awarded Wanjiru Sh150,000 as general damages.
Wanjiru had in 2013 purchased two Fanta pineapple 300ml glass bottles of soda manufactured and marketed by Nairobi bottlers.
It was her evidence that when she reached home, she realised that one of the bottles had a straw sealed together with the contents of the bottle.
She subsequently instituted a suit against Nairobi bottlers and accused it of negligence and breach of contract in producing, marketing and selling a product that could not be consumed as a result of the impurities.
But the company denied the claim.
It argued that the alleged contaminated product came from its plant when it was fit for human consumption and that any contamination was caused by Wanjiru’s improper use of the product.
It contended that its 'products are manufactured under the most stringent quality control measures hence it was not liable as alleged or at all'.
The Magistrates court in its decision said it was Nairobi bottlers responsibility to take reasonable care when manufacturing its products.
It said the company acted negligently.
It further noted that Wanjiru did not adduce any evidence to back the claim that she suffered loss and damage but nevertheless awarded her shs 150,000 as general damages.
Aggrieved by this decision, the Nairobi bottlers appealed.
The company faulted the trial court for making an award when there was absolutely no basis.
It pointed out that Wanjiru did not at any time consume the soda which she had purchased from Nakumatt or mention the effects the soda had on her.
Justice Majanja in setting aside Mburu’s decision agreed with Nairobi bottlers that Wanjiru did not prove she suffered any harm, loss or damage when she purchased the soda which she did not consume.
‘On the whole therefore, there was sufficient evidence upon which the trial court found that the Appellant breached its duty of care to the Respondent. However, the Respondent failed to prove that she suffered any harm, loss or damage and that she was entitled to an award of damages,’ he ruled.
.jpg)
Post a Comment