STEPHEN DIAB DARKO vs. CHIRANO GOLD MINE LTD. [2013]DLCA8139

Date	2013-04-18
Suit No.	SUIT NO. 158/2011
Citation No.	[2013]DLCA8139

DENNIS ADJEI J.A

HONYENUGA J.A.

ACKAH-YENSU J.A

KWASI DANSO ACHEAMPONG ESQ. FOR THE 1ST DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

J.B. DARKWA DWAMENA ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENT

[2013]DLCA8139
																																						<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" >STEPHEN DIAB
DARKO<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p>CHIRANO GOLD MINE LTD.<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, CAPE COAST]<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. 158/2011&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; &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:
18TH APRIL, 2013<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL.<o:p></o:p>KWASI
DANSO ACHEAMPONG ESQ. FOR THE 1ST DEFENDANT/APPELLANT<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">

J.B.
DARKWA DWAMENA ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFFS/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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

DENNIS
ADJEI J.A, HONYENUGA J.A., ACKAH-YENSU J.A <o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <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">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>DENNIS
ADJEI,J.A:<o:p></o:p>The
defendant/appellant (hereafter called the defendant dissatisfied with the
judgment of the High Court Sefwi Wiawso delivered on 9th
December,2010 filed an appeal against the said judgment to this court. The
plaintiff/respondent would be referred to in this appeal as plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>The
brief facts of the case which culminated in this appeal were that the plaintiff
was an employee of the defendant company. The plaintiff worked with the elution
section of the processing plant of the defendant mining company. The
plaintiff’s work entailed the boiling of chemicals “for stripping of gold” and
the taking in a two hourly interval, pressure and temperature readings at the
top of the elution strainer column. He worked for 12 hours a day that is from
7:00am to 7:00pm. On 31st December, 2007 when the plaintiff went to
take the last readings at the top of the elution strainer column for the day, an
explosion occurred from the elution strainer which burnt some parts of his body.
He was burnt by the mixture of hot cynide and caustic soda exploded from the
elution strainer. He was admitted at the Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital Kumasi
until 23rd January,2008 when he was discharged to the&nbsp; out patient department. He maintained an
action against the defendant, his employers for failing to provide safety free
environment for him at the High Court. The plaintiff was found to have
negligently contributed to the accident and his contribution was assessed at
ten percent (10%). The defendant’s contribution to the accident was assessed at
ninety percent (90%). The defendant dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial
High Court filed an appeal against the judgment. The three (3) ground of appeal
filed by the defendant are as follows:<o:p></o:p>“a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The
trial Judge erred&nbsp; when he held&nbsp; by the&nbsp;
implication&nbsp; sustained on the job
by the plaintiff on 31st December,2007 was&nbsp; caused by the personal negligence or willful
act of the Defendant/Appellant.<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; the
judgment of the trial Judge cannot be supported by the plaintiff’s evidence
adduced to prove that it was the Defendant’s personal negligence or willful act
that caused the plaintiff’s injury.<o:p></o:p>c.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; the &nbsp;quantum of damages&nbsp; and costs&nbsp;
awarded by the trial was not&nbsp;
excessive but&nbsp; that award in
particular&nbsp; is not supported by the&nbsp; totality of evidence placed before the trial
Judge”.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
combined effect of grounds (a) and (b) of the appeal is that the accident which
caused injury to the plaintiff on 31st December,2007 was neither
caused by the personal negligence or the willful act of the defendant and the
trial High Court Judge therefore erred by not dismissing the plaintiffs action
for want of jurisdiction. The workmen’s compensation Act, 1987 PNDCL 187 regulates
the compensation payable to employees employed by the Republic as well as
private persons except in the case of persons in the Armed Forces. Section 2 of
PNDCL 187 provides that an employee who sustains personal injury by accident
arising out of and in the course of employment must be paid compensation by his
employers and should be in accordance with the Act. However, there are
circumstances under which an employer shall refuse to pay compensation</main>