ATTA vs. GHANA HIGHWAY AUTHORITY. [1979]DLHC1042

Date	1979-03-15
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1979]DLHC1042

ANSAH-TWUM J.

J. A. DAWSON FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

ATTA ERSKINE (FOR BROWN & CO.) FOR THE DEFENDANTS.

[1979]DLHC1042
																																						<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" >ATTA <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>GHANA HIGHWAY AUTHORITY.<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, SEKONDI]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[1980] GLR 119<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:
15 MARCH 1979<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">

J. A. DAWSON FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p>

ATTA ERSKINE (FOR BROWN &amp; CO.) FOR THE
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">

ANSAH-TWUM J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ANSAH-TWUM J.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff who claims to be the owner of the V.W. private car No. W.R. 9226, has
instituted this action against the defendants, the owners of the tipper truck
No. G.J. 4735, claiming damages for damage allegedly caused to the vehicle No.
W.R. 9226, by driver Alfred Kofi Afful, the defendants’ servant or agent, who
was at the material time in charge of the tipper truck No. G.J. 4735. The
plaintiff claims that the accident involving both vehicles mentioned herein,
and as a result of which his said vehicle was damaged, was caused solely
through the fault of driver Afful.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
defendants who (entered a conditional appearance) having in their statement of
defence denied liability, have pleaded further, in paragraph (5) of the
statement of defence, 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">“At the
summons for directions stage of the suit herein the defendants will make an
application to this honourable court to strike out the writ of summons herein
on the ground that it is bad in law in that the plaintiff failed to give to the
defendants notice of his intention to commence the suit herein against the
defendants in accordance with section 33 of the Ghana Highway Authority Decree,
1974 (N.R.C.D. 298).”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Counsel
for the defendants, pursuant to the conditional appearance filed and the
subsequent pleading in paragraph (5) of their statement of defence quoted
(supra) has, now at the summons for directions stage, taken a preliminary
objection to the effect that the plaintiff failed to give the proper statutory
notice as required under section 33 of N.R.C.D. 298, before he instituted this
action and that, therefore, the action is not maintainable at this stage; the
same not being properly before the court. Section 33 (1) of N.R.C.D. 298 provides,
“No suit shall be commenced against the Authority until one month at least
after written notice of intention to commence it has been served upon the
Authority by the intending plaintiff or his agent.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>To this
objection learned counsel for the plaintiff has replied that the action is
maintainable at this stage and, therefore, the objection cannot be sustained,
since in his view, the proper statutory notice as required under the provisions
of section 33 of N.R.C.D. 298, has been given to the defendants. Counsel claims
that a written notice dated 1 December 1977 was served on the Regional Manager,
Ghana Highway Authority,<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Takoradi,
and the action was commenced on 23 May 1978. The notice referred to by counsel
for the plaintiff has been placed before the court and the last two paragraphs
read as follows:<o:p></o:p>“My
instructions in the circumstances are to demand from the Ghana Highway
Authority the sum of ¢5,620 being losses incurred by my client. Take notice
also that a month from the date of this letter I shall institute action against
the Authority for the recovery of the amount involved.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>I have
here quoted in extenso the above </main>