TANDOH vs. ADU [1961]DLHC5508

Date	1961-09-25
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1961]DLHC5508

APALOO J.

N.Y. B. ADADE FOR THE PLAINTIFF

A.A. AKAINYAH FOR THE DEFENDANT.

[1961]DLHC5508
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">TANDOH <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">vs. <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">ADU<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">&nbsp;[HIGH COURT, KUMASI]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">[1961] GLR 544&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE:<span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0"> 25TH SEPTEMBER, 1961.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

N.Y.
B. ADADE FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p>

A.A.
AKAINYAH FOR THE DEFENDANT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

APALOO, J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF APALOO, J.<o:p></o:p>On the 28th June, 1960, the plaintiff issued against the defendant
a writ claiming damages for assault, wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. To
the writ was attached a statement of claim. In so far as it is material to the
point at issue, the plaintiff’s case was that the defendant made a consciously
false complaint of theft against him to the police by reason of which he was
arrested and imprisoned by the Mankranso Local Authority Police for a number of
hours. The defendant controverted these facts and in particular it was denied
that the complaint, which the defendant admittedly made to the police, was
false or malicious. In the last paragraph of the statement of defence it was
pleaded that the plaintiff’s writ disclosed no cause of action and must be struck
out.<o:p></o:p>When trial opened before me on the 20th September, the plaintiff
failed to turn up. Both counsel agreeing to that course, I decided that the
averment in the last paragraph of the statement of defence be heard as a
preliminary issue. Although counsel for the defendant did not concede the truth
of the averments pleaded in the statement of claim, it was agreed that these
should be assumed for the purpose of the legal argument.<o:p></o:p>It was contended by counsel for the defendant, if I understand his
argument aright, that on the plaintiff ‘s own showing the person responsible
for his imprisonment was not the defendant. It was said that the police were
not obliged to arrest the plaintiff on receiving the defendant’s complaint but
had a discretion to do so. It was submitted that if the police in exercise of
their discretion arrested the plaintiff, the complainant was not liable.
Counsel contended that this is so even if the complaint was consciously false
and malicious. It was submitted that the complainant would be liable only if
the police refused to arrest and were obliged to do so on the insistence of the
defendant. I was referred to the definition of false imprisonment in Winfield’s
Law of Tort in which he quoted the old Termes de la Ley. It is not material to
set this out as the legal meaning of false imprisonment is well known and I
hope I understand it. I was also1(1) referred to the orthodox cases on the
subject, viz. Brown v. Chapman and Sewell v. National Telephone Co.2(2) In the
former of these cases, Coltman, J. decided in 1848: “If an individual prefers a
complaint to a magistrate, and procures a warrant to be granted, upon which the
accused is taken into custody, the complainant, in such a case, is not liable
in trespass for the imprisonment.”3(3) In the latter case, the Court of Appeal
decided in England in 1907 that the signing of a charge sheet standing alone is
not evidence of anything directly causing the imprisonment of a person charged
and will not support an action for false imprisonment against the person who
signs.4(4) Counsel for the plaintiff distinguished these two authorities, the
first on the ground, as I understand him, that, the detention of the plaintiff
was a judicial as opposed to a ministerial act, the second on the ground that the
plaintiff was detained by the police and all that the defendant did was to sign
a charge sheet ex post facto. In neither of these cases was the complaint on
which the police or the magistrate acted found to be consciously false or
malicious. Accordingly notwithstanding their undoubted authority, I do not find
these two cases of assistance in resolving the problem with which I am
confronted.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Mr. Adade for the plaintiff basing himself almost entirely on
Clerk and Lindsell on Torts submitted that the defendant would be liable if he
made a charge on which it became the duty of the police to act although he made
no express demand. Accordingly, he contended that the defendant having on the
assumed facts made a consciously false complaint of theft on which the police
acted in the detention of the plaintiff, he was liable for the resulting
imprisonment for which, he contended, there was no lawful excuse.<o:p></o:p>I take it to be fairly well established that if the complainant
directed or authorised the wrongful imprisonment, he is clearly liable.
Although neither counsel said so in express terms, I think both arguments
proceeded on the footing that this is a correct statement of the law. There is
no averment in the plaintiff ‘s statement of claim and I can only again assume
that the defendant neither authorised nor directed the plaintiff’s arrest and
imprisonment.<o:p></o:p>