ELVIS ODEI vs. PRINCE ADU & ORS [2002]DLHC7497

Date	2002-12-20
Suit No.	SUIT NO. L. 278/2001
Citation No.	[2002]DLHC7497

HIS LORDSHIP YAW APPAU J.

NANCY AMPOSO MS. FOR PLAINTIFF.

[2002]DLHC7497
																																						<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" >ELVIS ODEI<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>PRINCE ADU &amp; ORS<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

SUIT
NO. L. 278/2001&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; DATE: 20TH DECEMBER 2002<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

NANCY
AMPOSO MS. FOR PLAINTIFF.<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

</div>Plaintiff
sued the defendants claiming Special and general damages suffered as a result
of injuries sustained in an accident involving vehicle with Registration No. GR
7695 Q on 30/1/00, due to the negligent driving of the 1st defendant, then
agent or servant of the 2nd and 3rd defendants, plus interest on any sums found
due to the plaintiff from the date of the accident to date of payment. <o:p></o:p>The
defendants who were served through substitution failed to enter appearance to
the writ. Interlocutory judgment in default of appearance was accordingly
entered against the defendants in favour of plaintiff on 29/10/01. <o:p></o:p>Before
then the 4th defendant's name was struck-out from the action leaving only the
1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants. <o:p></o:p>The
three defendants were again served with hearing notices through substitution to
appear in court for the assessment of damages but failed to do so. This court
was therefore compelled, under the circumstances, to hear plaintiff's case in
the absence of defendants. <o:p></o:p>Plaintiff
testified without calling any witness but tendered in evidence three (3)
exhibits in support of his case. These were; <o:p></o:p>1.
A police medical report form tendered as Exhibit 'A'. <o:p></o:p>2.
A medical report and assessment of disability from the Surgical Department of
the University of Ghana Medical School, Korle-Bu TENDERED AS exhibit 'B', and <o:p></o:p>3.
Receipts covering medical bills and drugs purchased tendered together as
Exhibit 'C'. <o:p></o:p>From
the pleadings, plaintiff was asking for special damages of ¢670,000.00. Though
in his testimony plaintiff could not supply receipts to cover the whole amount
being claimed as special damages, as the receipts tendered i.e. 'C', total only
¢323,300.00, he gave convincing reasons as to why he could not do so. <o:p></o:p>This
court is therefore convinced that he is entitled to the amount being claimed as
special damages. <o:p></o:p>On
general damages, the evidence of plaintiff shows clearly that he is entitled to
damages for pains and suffering arising out from injuries sustained during the
accident. <o:p></o:p>There
is evidence that the injuries have left scars over parts of plaintiff’s body
with even a little deformation of the upper lip and the right wrist. Judging
from the medical report on the degree of disability, the court is of the view
that ¢5 million would be appropriate under this head. <o:p></o:p>The
court accordingly makes the following awards in plaintiff’s favour: <o:p></o:p>a)
¢670,000.00 as special damages, and <o:p></o:p>b)
¢5 million as general damages. <o:p></o:p>The
court however declines to award any interest on the above amounts as plaintiff
claimed. <o:p></o:p>

There
will be costs of ¢3 million against defendants.<o:p></o:p></main>