Pool v H. Savy Insurance Co Ltd (CS 105/2015) [2017] SCSC 388 (01 June 2016);


Civil Side: CS 105/2015

[2016] SCSC 388







Heard: Counsel:

3 May 2016

Mr. France Bonte for plaintiff

for defendant


Delivered:                     1 June 2016


Robinson J

[I]        This suit proceeded ex parte.

[2]        Plaintiff is Jose Pool.  Defendant  is H. Savy Insurance Co. Ltd..

[3] Plaintiff   "is and was at  all  material times" the  owner  of  a  vehicle   Geep~ bearing registration  number S20378.  Defendant  is an insurance company  that insured, under third party cover (fire and theft), the said jeep (exhibit P1).

[4] On  15 September,  2014,  Plaintiffs   son had invited  a few friends  to the house   Plaintiff who  was  asleep  was awoken  by a  phone  call  from  "someone" at about  one  a.m .. The caller  asked  Plaintiff  about  the whereabouts  of  Plaintiffs   jeep.  Plaintiff  told  the caller that  his jeep  was  parked  inside  the  garage.  The  caller  told  Plaintiff  to  look  inside  the garage  to  ascertain  whether  the jeep  was  parked  inside  of  it. Plaintiff  went   to  look. Plaintiffs  jeep  was not inside the garage. According  to Plaintiff, one Hubert  Mothee, his son's  friend,  had stolen  his jeep  and driven  away.  Plaintiff  did not see Hubet Motheer steal his jeep  and drive away.  Plaintiffs  jeep  while being driven  by Hubert  Mothee was involved  in an accident.  According  to Plaintiff the jeep  was damaged  beyond repair   and declared a write-off.

[5]        Plaintiff is consequently  claiming from Defendant Seychelles  rupees 647, 000.0  /- in that respect; interests; costs; and any other order as to the court may seem fit.

[6]        I have considered  the evidence  for Plaintiff. The  issue for the determination  of this   court is whether  Plaintiff  has established  his case  on a balance  of probabilities.    I state  that there is no evidence on record other than that of Plaintiff on which this court could rely in favour of Plaintiffs   contention  that Hubert  Mothee had stolen his jeep  and driven away. In my judgment  Plaintiff did not convince  me that Hubert Mothee had stolen his jeep  and driven  away.  With  respect  to  his  claim  for  damages  Plaintiff  offered  no  evidence  in support of his claim. In light of the above I hold that Plaintiff has not established his case on a balance of probabilities.

[7]In the result, I dismiss Plaintiff's claim. Plaintiff shall bear his own costs.



Signed, dated and delivered at Ile du Port on  1 June 2016




F Robinson
Judge   of the Supreme   Court