ELECTRICITY COMPANY OF GHANA vs. DOROTHY KINGSLEY-NYINAH (MRS.) AND PATRICK KINGSLEY-NYNAH [2017]DLCA4650

ELECTRICITY COMPANY OF GHANA vs. DOROTHY KINGSLEY-NYINAH (MRS.) AND PATRICK KIN... [2017]DLCA4650

Date	2017-10-19
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO.H1/170/2017
Citation No.	[2017]DLCA4650

S. MARFUL-SAU J.A. (PRESIDING)

F.G. KORBIEH J.A.

I.O.TANKO AMADU J.A.

KWAMENA FYNN AIKINS FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

NAA ODOFOLEY NORTEY FOR THE PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS

[2017]DLCA4650
																																						<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="mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;
color:#00B0F0">ELECTRICITY COMPANY OF GHANA<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>DOROTHY
KINGSLEY-NYINAH (MRS.) AND PATRICK KINGSLEY-NYNAH<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

CIVIL APPEAL NO.H1/170/2017&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: 19TH
OCTOBER, 2017<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>KWAMENA FYNN AIKINS
FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT<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">

NAA
ODOFOLEY NORTEY FOR THE PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS<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 1.0pt 0in">

S.
MARFUL-SAU J.A. (PRESIDING), F.G. KORBIEH J.A., I.O.TANKO AMADU J.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div>&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;<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">

JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>F.G.KORBIEH, J.A.<o:p></o:p>The brief
facts of this case are that the plaintiffs/respondents (hereinafter referred to
only as the respondents) are a married couple who sued the defendant/appellant (hereinafter
referred to only as the appellant) in the High Court, Accra claiming the
following reliefs: (i) general damages, (ii) interests on the general damages
from the 26th May 2008 to the date of payment and (iii) costs
including solicitor’s fees. In their amended statement of claim they averred
that the appellant had supplied electric power to them for valuable
consideration at House No. 799/1, Osu RE in Accra but that on or about 26th
May, 2008 there was power fluctuation and erratic power outages at the area
where their premises were situated. They averred further that around 5:40pm
their house-help noticed smoke coming from the premises which, upon her
investigations, led to the discovery of fire in the living room of the
premises. They also further that the fire and damage arising therefrom were the
result of the negligence of the appellant in not ensuring a safe supply of
electricity to the premises occupied by them. They again averred that the fire
caused extensive damage to their property as well as household equipment and
gadgets all of which cost the plaintiffs GHC57,074.50 to repair or replace.
They intimated that they were going to rely on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur at the trial. In its
amended statement of defense, the appellant traversed all of the averments made
by the respondents (save one or two) and went to aver (amongst others as
follows: that the respondents, like all other property owners, had the duty to
ensure that they wired their house to include proper earthling and maintain
thereafter and that its responsibility stopped at the point of supplying the
meter to a customer’s house. The appellant also averred that it was the duty of
the customer to have a functional fuse within the premises and that on the 26th
May, 2008 officials of the Ghana National Fire Service called its office to
request that the house be disconnected because the house was on fire and this
was done. It again averred that its investigations revealed that the fire
started from the main switch of a split air-conditioner and the earthling of
the premises was unsatisfactory and the main switch was without neutral-earth
bonding and that other premises receiving electrical power supply from the same
transformer and pole supplied by the appellant did not have any electrical
problems. The appellant averred further that the respondents did not inform it of
the additional electrical items or gadgets mentioned in their pleadings and that
the cause of the fire outbreak was attributable to the respondents themselves. The
appellant pleaded that the doctrine of res
ipsa loquitur was not applicable to this case as the cause of the fire was
known.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>After due
process, the case went to trial and the learned trial judge delivered his
judgment in which he ordered the appellant to pay general damages of
GHC70,000.00 ‘inclusive of the value placed on the items as per exhibit “B” is
an ideal amount to place the plaintiffs in their former situation.’ It is this
judgment that the appellant has appealed against on the following grounds:<o:p></o:p>a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The
learned Judge erred when he relied heavily on the evidence of PW1.<o:p></o:p>b.