ADU v. GLIKSTEN WEST AFRICA LTD. AND ANOTHER

JUDGMENT OF APALOO J.

By his writ issued out of this court on the 15th September, 1959, the plaintiff claims against the defendants the sum of £G1,150 being damage caused to the plaintiff's lorry as a result of the negligence of the second defendant.

The plaintiff was the owner of a five-ton Austin lorry No. AS.7245. This lorry was used in transporting goods between Takoradi and Kumasi and Bibiani and Takoradi. At the times material to this action, the plaintiff employed Kofi Fofie as the driver of the said lorry. On the 13th December, 1957, the plaintiff's said driver was travelling between Bibiani and Takoradi with goods. When he was three miles out of Bibiani, be parked his lorry on his near side and alighted to have breakfast. It was about 9 a.m. Not long after he alighted, he heard a bang. This came from a timber truck which crashed into the plaintiff's stationary lorry from behind. It was a straight road and visibility was good. That timber truck belonged to the first defendant-company and was at the time of the accident in the charge of the second defendant, its driver and servant. The second defendant was clearly wanting in care. I find that the accident was due to his want of care. Indeed, when he was charged with careless driving as a result of the accident he confessed to his negligence at the district magistrate's court, Bibiani. In his statement of defence, the first defendant pleaded that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence. No evidence was led in support of this. I find that the second defendant was solely to blame for the accident. In my judgment, both defendants are jointly and severally liable to the plaintiff for the loss suffered by him.

As a result of the impact the plaintiff's lorry was pushed out of the road into a ditch. Its hood was completely broken, the frame was damaged and so also were the mudguard, the tyre rod and the gearbox.

I am satisfied that when the accident thus occurred both the plaintiff's driver and the second defendant went together to the police station at Bibiani. The police arrived there later and took measurements and carried on other routine investigation. This done, the plaintiff's driver made a 50 mile journey to Kumasi where he reached about 5 p.m. An hour later, that is at 6 p.m., he informed the plaintiff of the accident. In the meantime the plaintiff's lorry remained unattended in the ditch. Both the plaintiff and his driver proceeded to the scene of accident the next morning. When th