STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION vs. OPOKU-DARKWA [1974]DLHC2333

Date	1974-05-16
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1974]DLHC2333

EDWARD WIREDU J.

F. E. OBENG FOR THE APPLICANTS.

K. A. SARPONG FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1974]DLHC2333
																																						<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">STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION <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">OPOKU-DARKWA<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[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] 1 GLR 439<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:
16 MAY 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">

F. E.
OBENG FOR THE APPLICANTS.<o:p></o:p>

K. A.
SARPONG FOR THE RESPONDENT.<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>This is
an application by the State Insurance Corporation (which shall hereafter be
referred to simply as the applicants) the underwriters of the defendant in this
action, to set aside a default judgment obtained by the plaintiff against the
defendant on or about 25 March 1974.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The facts
on which the applicants are seeking to set aside the said judgment as set out
in their original supporting affidavit are that they were persons who have been
injuriously affected by the said judgment as they were under a statutory dutv
to pay the plaintiff the amount of the judgment and that if the judgment
remains undisturbed by an order of the court they would be liable to the
plaintiff in the sum awarded in the absence of any defence.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
propriety of the application is not in doubt. For the right of insurers to set
aside default judgments obtained against their insured is now set to rest by
authorities: see Jacques v. Harrison (1883) 50 L.T 246, C.A., Windsor v.
Chalcraft [1938] 2 All E.R. 751, C.A. and Vasquez v. Quarshie, High Court,
Accra, 16 January 1968, unreported; digested in (1968) C.C. 66.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The brief
facts of this case which have provoked the present application are as follows:
On 13 December 1973 a writ was issued by the plaintiff against the defendant in
respect of an accident which occurred on 23 March 1973. Notice that the writ
had been issued was given to the applicants as the insurers of the defendant.
The writ itself was served on 31 January 1974, but the defendant failed to
enter an appearance. On 25 February 1974, an interlocutory judgment was
obtained against the defendant in default of appearance and the case set down
for assessment of damages on 11 March 1974. Even though the defendant was
served with notice of assessment of damages he failed to appear and on 25 March
1974, judgment in the sum of ¢48,030.00 damages was awarded in favour of the
plaintiff. On the following day, i.e. 26 March entry of judgment was filed for
service on the defendant.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It is the
complaint of the applicants that:<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">“(1)
There was no notice given to the applicants that the writ of summons had been
served on the defendant-respondent or that the case has been set down for
trial. <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">(2) The
second defendant-respondent policy holder was a nominal defendant and failed to
enter appearance or attend court. <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">(3)
Judgment was entered against the defendant-respondent on 25 March 1974, in
default for the sum of fifty thousand, seven hundred and eighty cedis costs
inclusive. (4) The applicants being the underwriters for the nominal defendant
have been injuriousl</main>