ADDAI v. ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND ANOTHER
June 14, 1976
HIGH COURT
GHANA
Areas of Law
- Tort Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
June 14, 1976
HIGH COURT
GHANA
Try asking the following...
JUDGMENT OF MENSA BOISON J.
This is a claim under the Civil Liability Act, 1963 (Act 176). The plaintiff who was the father of one Efia Ampoma (deceased) claims as personal representative of the deceased from the defendants jointly and severally “general damages for the sudden and untimely death of his daughter, Efia Ampoma, through the negligent driving of the second defendant, the servant of the Ministry of Education, Sunyani, in the course of his employment." [His lordship here referred to the statement of claim and continued:] Briefly the plaintiff's daughter, a school girl of fifteen years old was, on 16 February 1973, at Sunyani, knocked down and killed by a lorry driven by the second defendant in circumstances that clearly spelt negligence. The first defendant, representing the Ministry of Education as the employers of the second defendant, filed what may be described as a token defence clearly meant to bide time to settle the claim.
On 6 April 1976, the learned senior state attorney at Sunyani appeared as counsel for the defendants and announced, according to his brief, the terms of settlement for a judgment of the court. The terms were as follows:
(a) Loss of dependency .. .. .. 2,000.00
(b) Funeral expenses 200.00
(c) Loss of expectation of life 250.00
(d) Counsel’s costs 100.00
For reasons which I shall set out presently, I declined to enter the judgment asked for; and as counsel for the plaintiff was absent from the hearing, I adjourned the matter with a request that he appears to make any submissions on the points I had taken on the terms of the settlement.
The first point was that particulars of loss of dependency should be pleaded to show, as foundation for evidence, that the plaintiff could be said to be a beneficiary of "a reasonable expectation of pecuniary benefit [or money's worth] from the continuance of life" of the deceased daughter, as stated in the headnote to Taff Vale Railway Co. v. Jenkins [1913] A.C. 1, H.L. In assessing such prospective damages the court has to have regard to the facts of the deceased's contribution at the time of her death. "Because in most cases the most reliable guide as to what would happen in the future if the deceased had lived is what did in fact happen in the past when he was alive..." per Diplock L.J. (as he then was) in Malyon v. Plummer [1963] 2 W.L.R. 1213 at p. 1226 , C.A.
Mr. Akoto, counsel for the plaintiff, in effect invited me to presume that damages would naturally flow from
AI Generated Summary
Justice Mensa Boison of the High Court considered a wrongful-death claim under the Civil Liability Act arising from the death of fifteen-year-old Efia Ampoma in Sunyani after being struck by a Ministry of Education lorry driven by the second defendant. The plaintiff, Ampoma’s father and personal representative, sought damages, and on 6 April 1976 the defendants—represented by a senior state attorney—proposed a consent judgment with specified sums for loss of dependency, funeral expenses, loss of expectation of life, and costs. The judge declined to enter the consent judgment because the statement of claim contained no pleaded particulars supporting loss-of-dependency damages. He emphasized that dependency requires evidence of a reasonable expectation of pecuniary benefit, guided by past contributions and household financial arrangements, citing Taff Vale v Jenkins, Malyon v Plummer, and Street on Damages. As consent judgments are indivisible, rejection of the dependency head defeated the whole; the court suggested adjournment for settlement and striking out upon conclusion.