Raju appointed Kariuki to transport fresh fish from Mombasa to Nairobi. As Kariuki was preparing to leave Mombasa to Nairobi, it rained heavily and the Thange River Bridge was swept off. As a result, Kariuki chartered a flight to Nairobi to deliver the fish as he feared the fish would go bad and he was unable to immediately contact Raju. However, upon arrival in Nairobi and delivery of fish, Raju refused to reimburse Kariuki charges for the flight Kariuki intents to sue Raju. Advice him.
• This problem is based on the liability of the principal in an agency of necessity.
• In this case it is apparent that Kariuki was Rajus agent for the purpose of transporting the fish to Nairobi. It is also evident that the heavy rain created an emergency and it was impossible for him to seek instructions from Raju, he had to act in good faith as owner thereof.
• In the circumstances of the case, Kariuki became an agent of necessity and acted bona fide to safe guard the fish. Raju is therefore bound to reimburse Kariuki the flight charges.
• My advise to Kariuki is to sue Raju for the charges, as he had presumed authority to incur the same.
• My advise is based on the decision in Great Northern Railway Co V. Swaffield.