Description

APOLLO INSURANCE V FLAVIA RODRIGUES AND CO.

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI

CIVIL CASE      OF 2002

• APOLLO INSURANCE CO. LJ L) PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

-FIAVIA RODRIGUES                              DEFENDANT

M/S FLAVIA RODRIGUES & CO. ADVOCATES

JUDGMENT

On the f&2.02 the took dates for he•üt-itnq of this suit by consent to be heard on 24 and 25 June 2003. On the said dev fixed for hearinq. the suit was called out. The advocate for the piainüíf came late. I he advocate for the defendant did not appear at all despite the court waitina for her. The proceedina Droc.eeded the follovnna day under order 9b r 3(a) CPR; nameiy that the court vas satisfied that the defendant had notice of the hearing date but had failed to anoear; the hearina is Demitted to Droc.eed ex oare

A:      Background of the case.

Flavia Rodrigues

T/a M/S Flavia Rodrigues and Co. Advocates has been sued for Professional negiigence bv her then instructing client M/S Appollos Insurance co. Ltd.

Appoilos jnsurance Co. Ltd insured the client M/S Car and Genera( Automofive Limited’s motor vehicle registration KLIQ 553

Mazda Saloon. The vehicle was being driven by one

^John Nvarancji Rasugu (now deceased) an etnplovee of Car and

^Genera{ (Automotive) Limited on the 3 ‘h day of October 1.992

^Whilst driving along the KitaleTWebuye road, the vehicle had a tyre

3

13

burst resulting to a self accident. John bodily injures being multiple fractures to his forearm and leqs He then sued his ernployer for damages. He had instructed by dated ‘l -l . •10.96 M/S Masese ancl company advocates hut later changed advocates to M/S Gichctlci King-ara Co. Advocates

The defendants encjaqed the services of M/S Lilian i^sijuquna & Co. advocates who duly filed a defenc.e and siqned the agreed issues for determination in this case. The plainliff amended his plaint. It was for the first time that the name of Flavia Rodrigues and Coadvocates appeared. Thère was no mention of M/S Lillian Njuguna

Nho had originally entered appearance for the defendant.                                                          As it

‘ stands M/S Flavia Rodrigues have never been on record in this matter nor did they file any documents to this effect. They had no legal authority to conduct this suit on behalf of the defendant.

If perchance they were indeed •on record then the sequence of event can be noted as follows–

The advocate/defend-ant in this case send another advocate to nduct this case on and off. The trial proceeded before

22 APOLLO INSURANCE V FLAVIA RODRIGUES AND CO.-1-2