AFAGYARE AND KOBI vs. GASSOUB [1962]DLHC1324

Date	1962-03-21
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1962]DLHC1324

DJABANOR J.

J. K. PREMPEH FOR THE PLAINTIFFS.

G. DAVEY FOR THE DEFENDANT.

[1962]DLHC1324
																																						<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:#00B0F0">AFAGYARE AND KOBI <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:#00B0F0">V. <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:#00B0F0">GASSOUB<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>[1962] 1 GLR 190<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

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"> 21ST MARCH, 1962.<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">

J.
K. PREMPEH FOR THE PLAINTIFFS.<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 2.0pt 0in">

DJABANOR J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF
DJABANOR J.<o:p></o:p>In this case the plaintiff claimed from the defendant damages for
non-performance of a contract in which the defendant undertook to demolish and
rebuild premises situate at plot No. K.O. 101 at Kumasi. On completion of the
contract within eighteen months, the plaintiffs were to grant to the defendant
a sub-lease of the whole premises for a term of 60 years, subject to their
retaining a number of rooms in the new house in respect of which no payment was
to be made.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On the 8th October, 1959, this court entered interlocutory
judgment in favour of the plaintiffs and the district valuer, in the person of
Mr. J. E. Hall was appointed as referee to go into the question of quantum of
damages and to submit a report to the court. This report has been submitted.
The question for me to determine is which of the quanta of damages recommended
should properly be adopted.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Mr. Prempeh for the plaintiffs submitted that the referee’s report
as to special damages be adopted. He did not state which of the three
assessments he sought to adopt. He, how- ever, asked for substantial general
damages.<o:p></o:p>Mr. Davey, for the defendant stressed that the proper principle to
follow in considering the quantum of damages is that enunciated in Hadley v.
Baxendale.1(1) With that I entirely agree. He further submitted inter alia,
that what the plaintiffs have lost is the use of the two living rooms and two
stores.<o:p></o:p>[His lordship here read part of the referee’s report as set out in
the headnote and continued.]<o:p></o:p>It is not disputed that in furtherance of the building agreement
the house in question was demolished, and never rebuilt again. It is obvious
that any special damages must necessarily include compensation for the loss of
the swish building and rents therefrom for its limited span of life. This the
referee valued at £G1,314.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The next point is whether the plaintiffs are entitled to
compensation for the loss of rights and profits to be expected as a result of
the completion of the contract. In my view I think they are entitled to such
compensation, and I am fortified in this view by the authority of first,
Victoria Laundry (Windsor) Ltd. v. Newman Industries Ltd., etc.2(2) where it
was held that damages for loss of profit were recoverable if it was apparent to
the defendants as reasonable persons that the delay in delivery was liable to
lead to such loss by the plaintiffs, and it was not necessary for the
defendants to be specifically informed of the particular purpose for which the
boiler (in this case) was required; on the facts the defendants had means of
knowledge that some loss was likely to result, and they were, therefore, liable
to the plaintiffs.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The second authority is taken from Laws of England (3rd ed.)
Halsbury, Vol. 3, pages 486 and 487, paras. 953 and 954, on measure of damages
in respect of building contracts:<o:p></o:p>