Search court decisions

…All she appears to say is that even if the explanation were true it would only show negligence on the part of counsel and that the applicant has remedy against counsel for such negligence I do not think that is a proper basis…

…The plaintiff claimed that the assault was “caused and/or precipitated by the defendant’s negligence, in the management and control of its factory/premises”.…

…He proceeded to give particulars of such negligence in para 4 of his plaint.…

…In my judgment negligence has been established against the second defendant and I find him liable to the plaintiff.…

…Some suggestion has been canvassed on the issue of contributory negligence on the part of the driver of motor vehicle Reg No KNN 997.…

…The plaintiff alleged that it was due to the defendant’s negligence in the way its Leyland lorry was driven, which resulted in the vehicle being involved in an accident, thus causing the loss and damage complained of.…

…The plaintiff was insured, so the insurance met the loss, but that money has not got to be recovered from the defendant whose negligence resulted in the accident.…

…The plaintiff’s claim on the basis of negligence hinges on the allegation that DW 1, i.e the night attendant or receptionist unlawfully permitted Amrik Singh this was done against the plaintiff’s wishes.…

…There was therefore no negligence on the part of any of the defendant’s servants with regard to Amrik entrance to the plaintiff’s room and consequently his claim on negligence must fail.…

…In the final analysis I hold the plaintiff’s injuries resulted from the negligence of the contractors (or the plaintiff’s employers) who were responsible for the excavation of the pit.…

…The Plaintiff’s negligence? I have to direct myself as to possible contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff.…

…In the threeparagraph defence, the Defendant denied any negligence as alleged in the plaint and put the Plaintiff to the strick proof of her allegations.…

…Paragraph 4 alleges negligence on the part of the Defendant’s servant/agent and sets out the particulars of the alleged negligence.…

…The defence denied there was any negligence on their part. The defence stated that the accident was solely caused or substantially contributed by the Plaintiffs negligence.…

…seeking damages both special and general for injuries sustained in an accident while at his place of work with the defendant and which accident occurred as a result of the breach of contract and duty to him and also due to negligence…

…denying the allegations in the plaint, denied that there was breach of duty or contract between them, denied that an accident occurred as alleged, that if any accident occurred which is denied then the same was occasioned by negligence…

…At the hearing of the suit the Plaintiff’s witnesses adduced evidence to the effect that c. the accident was due to the negligence of the 1st defendant who was the 2nd defendant’s servant. They were duly cross-examined.…

…The burden of proving that there was no negligence on the part of the driver was clearly his.…

……………DEFENDANT JUDGMENT The plaintiff filed this suit on 25/10/83 to recover damages for injuries she sustained in a road accident allegedly due to the defendant’s negligence.…

…Those circumstances give rise to the inference of negligence.…

…The defendants filed a defence in which they denied the negligence allegedly attributed to lst defendant and the particulars of it given in the plaint.…

…In the alternative they averred that the said accident was solely caused or substantially contributed to by the negligence f the plaintiff’s servant and / or agent for which the plaintiff was vicariously liable.…

…The plaintiff pleads that the accident was caused by negligence of the tractor driver, or matatu driver or the negligence of both drivers and has set out the acts of negligence of each of the two drivers in para 7 of the…

…The owner and driver of the matatu on the other hand, in their amended defence deny negligence and attribute the accident to the negligence of the owner and driver of the tractor.…

…Hence the issue now is to determine the degree of negligence of each driver. It is not in dispute that the lorry was driving downhill while the ambulance was going uphill.…

…In my view that is the only negligence that can be attributed to the driver of the ambulance otherwise this accident occurred due to the negligence of the lorry driver.…

…He brought this action against the Defendant claiming that the Defendant was negligent and that it was such negligence which occasioned the accident.…

…At first the Defendant denied liability for the negligence but on the 30th October, 1991, the parties agreed that the Plaintiff was himself 10% negligent while the Defendant was 90% negligent.…

…The plaintiff based his claim on the 1st defendant’s negligence for which the 2nd defendant firm is vicariously responsible. The defendants, for their part denied negligence.…

…I think the lst defendant was negligent and that his negligence was the substantial cause of the accident. I use the word “substantial” advisedly because, I cannot acquit the plaintiff of all blame.…

…it, One matter occurs to me and that is that it is possible that the plaintiff's car was hidden by the car that the defendant says the plaintiff was passing at the time of the collision, and, therefore, he was guilty of negligence…

…The plaintiff has failed to satisfy me that the defendant was guilty of any negligence and 1 dismiss the plaintiffs claim with costs dated this 3rd day of January, 1984. J P TRAINER JUDGE…

…KAJ 710F suffered fatal injuries in an accident caused by the negligence of the 2nd Defendant for which 1st defendant is vicariously liable.…

…There was negligence on the part of the defendants although there has been no evidence to enable me to pinpoint the exact stage at which that negligence occurred as between the time the letter was sent out by the High Court…

…During that period the plaintiff lost the freedom which he should not have lost had there not been the negligence of the defendants.…