PRAH AND ANOTHER vs. OKAI [1966]DLHC1742

Date	1966-06-17
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1966]DLHC1742

SOWAH J.

I. N. K. WUAKU WITH HIM D.A. BOYE FOR THE PLAINTIFFS.

A. A. ACKUAKU FOR THE FIRST DEFENDANT.

TURKSON FOR K. AZINA-NARTEY FOR THE THIRD FOURTH AND FIFTH DEFENDANTS.

[1966]DLHC1742
																																						<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" >PRAH AND ANOTHER <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>OKAI <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, HO]<o:p></o:p>[1966] GLR 560<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">

DATE:
17 JUNE 1966.<o:p></o:p>

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

I. N. K. WUAKU WITH HIM D.A. BOYE FOR THE
PLAINTIFFS.<o:p></o:p>

A. A. ACKUAKU FOR THE FIRST DEFENDANT.<o:p></o:p>

TURKSON FOR K. AZINA-NARTEY FOR THE THIRD, FOURTH
AND FIFTH DEFENDANTS.<o:p></o:p>

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

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

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF SOWAH J.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiffs are the widows of the late Francis Kwasivie Akyemde who died as a
result of a motor accident on 14 March 1964. They bring the action on behalf of
themselves and of the other dependants of the late Akyemde claiming the sum of
£G15,000 damages in accordance with the provisions of sections 16 (1) and 18 of
the Civil Liability Act, 1963,1 against all the defendants in the writ of
summons.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>No
evidence has been led why the action was not instituted in the name of the
personal representative nor indeed if there was any personal representative at
all; in view however that this action was instituted about a year after the
accident the point is not material for our purposes.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>One Kwame
Sankyere who was the only eyewitness or a person present in the car when it was
involved in the accident gave evidence for the plaintiffs. He said that on 14
March 1964 he, the deceased, one Mohamedu and one Kwasi Anorba travelled in a
car from Hohoe to Ho. Mohamedu was a magician, Sankyere and Anorba were
apprentices to Mohamedu. On arriving at Hohoe their car had a breakdown,
nevertheless they went to the Hotel de Majestic. The proprietor of the hotel
was the late Kwasivie Akyemde. At the hotel he saw his master talking to the late
Akyemde. Shortly after, they were given a Volkswagon car No. WE 2769 owned by
the first defendant who also provided them with a driver. He saw the first
defendant fill the petrol tank with petrol but he did not know what the
arrangements were concerning the loaning of the car. Sankyere said that they
were going to perform magic in the Hotel de Majestic but on arriving there,
they had no tickets in accordance with the provisions of the Entertainments
Duty Act, 1962.2 The late Akyemde therefore offered to travel to Ho with them
to help them obtain tickets from the revenue authorities. He said on that day,
they set out in the Volkswagon driven by the first defendant’s driver and
arrived safely in Ho. They went round to see various persons connected with the
issue of entertainment tickets but were unsuccessful in their mission and at
about 6.30 p.m. they decided to return to Hohoe. The late Akyemde was sitting
next to the driver and the rest of them were sitting on the back seat. When
they set out it was getting dark and therefore the driver put on the lights of
the car ; between mile nine and ten on the Ho-Anyirawase road, they saw an
oncoming vehicle, the driver of the Volkswagon dipped his lights and the
on-coming vehicle dipped in response. Almost as soon as they passed this
vehicle he said, “I heard a bang on our car: I heard someone shout ‘Christ I am
dead.’ I immediately passed out.” He continued, “Almost immediately after I
heard a bang on our car, I saw a caterpillar, I did not see any lights on the caterpillar.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In
passing it is necessary to point out that what the witness called a caterpillar
was in fact a 24 foot long grader. This is the whole of the evidence on which
the plaintiffs’ case was mounted in respect of the negligence of the
defendants.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On the
facts the principle of res ipsa loquitur is not applicable and no effort
whatsoever was made to prove the numerous particulars of negligence itemised in
the statement of claim. The evidence led to show the relationship between the
first defendant and the second defendant was so exiguous that nothing could
turn upon it.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
relationship of master and servant could not be spelled out. But this case is
one of the most astonishing cases that ever came before these courts.
Fortunately for the plaintiffs the defence provided the missing links and
indeed proved </main>