DANKWAH vs. THE REPUBLIC [1974]DLHC2270

Date	1974-11-01
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1974]DLHC2270

EDWARD WIREDU J.

SAMPSON FOR THE APPELLANT.

TURKSON STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1974]DLHC2270
																																						<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:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">DANKWAH <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:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">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:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">THE REPUBLIC <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, CAPE
COAST]<o:p></o:p>&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;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1974] 2 GLR 308<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:
1 NOVEMBER 1974.<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">

SAMPSON
FOR THE APPELLANT.<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">

EDWARD WIREDU J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF EDWARD WIREDU J.<o:p></o:p>On 13
August 1974, the appellant was arraigned before the Akim Oda District Court
Grade I charged with the offence of the use of an uninsured vehicle contrary to
section 3 (1) of the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Act, 1958 (No. 42
of 1958), hereinafter referred to as the 1958 Act.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
particulars of the information preferred against him read as follows:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“Kwasi
Appea Dankwa: Lorry Driver: For that you on 12 May 1974, on Akim Oda-Apotasu
bridge near State Transport Corporation, Akim Oda in the eastern magisterial
district and within the jurisdiction of this court, then being the owner and
driver in charge [of] Bedford lorry No. GG 5418 did drive the said vehicle on
the road when the third party insurance was not in force.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>He
pleaded guilty to the charge and was convicted and sentenced to a fine of ¢30
or two months’ imprisonment with hard labour. In addition, he was disqualified
from holding a driving licence for a period of twelve months, the statutory
minimum as required under section 3 (2) and (3) of the 1958 Act.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>His
original appeal to this court was against the sentence but on the appeal coming
on for summary hearing the point was raised on his behalf that on the facts as
presented by the prosecution the appellant could not in law have been guilty. I
therefore granted leave to counsel to argue the appeal against conviction also.<o:p></o:p>The facts
as presented by the prosecution against the appellant in the court below were
as follows: On 12 May 1974 round about 10.40 a.m. the appellant reported to the
police that he was descending a hill on the main Oda Commercial Street and
stopped behind a stationary Volkswagen car. That whilst being stationary a
Bedford vehicle drove into the rear of his vehicle causing damage to it. In the
course of police investigations into the appellant’s complaint, it was
discovered that there was no valid insurance certificate on the appellant’s
vehicle. The certificate having expired, the police took action against him accordingly
under section 3(1) of the 1958 Act.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The point
taken on behalf of the appellant in this appeal was that on the true
construction of section 3 (1) of the 1958 Act, the word use” contemplated some
active movement such as driving in the sense of the vehicle being in motion.
Learned counsel argued that the present facts showed that the vehicle of the
appellant was stationary when the accident in respect of which the police were
investigating occurred. He therefore contended that the vehicle not being in
motion the appellant could not be said to have used the vehicle within the
meaning of section 3 (1) of the 1958 Act. He submitted therefore that the
conviction of the appellant was wrong in law.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>