KUBI AND OTHERS vs. DALI [1985]DLCA932

Date	1985-07-15
Suit No.	-
Citation No.	[1985]DLCA932

APALOO C.J

MENSA BOISON JA

ABBAN J.A.

MRS. ATTA-QUAYSON FOR THE APPELLANTS

KWAME TETTEH FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1985]DLCA932
																																						<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" ><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

KUBI AND OTHERS <o:p></o:p>

{COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA} <o:p></o:p>

[1984-86] GLR 501<o:p></o:p>

DATE:
15 JULY 1985<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>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">

MRS.
ATTA-QUAYSON FOR THE APPELLANTS. <o:p></o:p>

KWAME
TETTEH 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">

APALOO C.J., MENSA BOISON AND ABBAN JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ABBAN J.A.<o:p></o:p>On 21 May
1981 there was a head-on collision between two vehicles on the
Asikuma-Frankadua motor road. The vehicles involved were AF 2294 and AZ 5690.
The first appellant was in charge of vehicle No AF 2294 as the driver and
servant of the second appellant, while the third appellant was the driver of
the fourth appellant.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
respondent (hereafter called the plaintiff), a 45 year-old trader, was a
fare-paying passenger on vehicle No AF 2294. She was travelling from Frankadua
to Dzemani market where she had intended to sell her goods. As a result of the
said collision, the two vehicles caught fire and in the ensuing conflagration,
the plaintiff sustained serious physical injuries and her goods which were on
the said vehicle also got completely burnt. The plaintiff attributed the cause
of the accident to the negligent driving of the first and third appellant.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In her
statement of claim, the plaintiff set out fully the particulars of the said
negligence and the injuries she suffered. The injuries she suffered resulted in
the amputation of her right leg above the knee. The plaintiff instituted an
action in the High Court, Ho claiming general and special damages.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
appellants (hereafter called the defendants) in their statements of defence
denied liability. Each driver put the liability for the negligence on the
other. That is the first defendant contended that the accident occurred through
the negligent driving of the third defendant, while the third defendant
insisted that the first defendant’s negligent conduct brought about the
collision. The plaintiff gave evidence at the trial and tendered a medical
report, exhibit A, showing the extent of the injuries she sustained. She also
tendered a list which, according to her, contained the description of all the
goods with which she travelled on the said vehicle.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>At the
close of the case for the plaintiff, counsel for the defendants intimated to
the learned trial judge that the defendants did not intend to offer any
evidence. Counsel on both sides then addressed the court. On 16 July 1984, the
learned High Court judge gave judgment for the plaintiff and awarded her a
global sum of ¢281,076 and concluded in the following manner:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“The plaintiff’s damages therefore break down
as follows: <o:p></o:p>¢ <o:p></o:p>1 Special
damages .. .. .. .. .. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5,500 <o:p></o:p>2 Goods
destroyed .. .. .. .. .. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;51,576 <o:p></o:p>