AMMA ANTWIWAA v. NAN LIMITED & ANOTHER
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- A. M. DOMAKYAAREH (MRS) J. A. PRESIDING
- A. B. POKU-ACHEAMPONG, J. A.
- S. K. A. ASIEDU, J. A
Areas of Law
- Tort Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Court of Appeal decision arises from a Techiman Circuit Court judgment in favor of Nan Limited and its driver, Abu Salam, after a collision at the Techiman Palace traffic lights in which Ama Antwiwaa, a farmer from Tuobodom, was knocked down. The police report noted the lights were faulty, traffic was being directed, and Antwiwaa crossed without observing traffic; the truck was uninsured, and the driver was later fined for careless driving while Antwiwaa was acquitted of crossing. Abu Salam was acting within his employment, headed to Dormaa to deliver goods. Crucially, he never entered appearance because he was not personally served, and no substituted service was attempted. The appellate court emphasized the burdens under the Evidence Act and the jurisdictional effect of non-service, found res ipsa loquitur inapplicable since the cause was known, and held that negligence was not proven; consequently, vicarious liability did not attach. The appeal was dismissed, the Circuit Court judgment affirmed, and no costs awarded.
POKU-ACHEAMPONG, J.A.:
This appeal emanates from the Circuit Court, Techiman against a judgment delivered by the Circuit Court Judge on 14th December, 2018 in favour of the Defendant/Respondent. Aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgment the Plaintiff/Appellant filed a notice of appeal on 12/3/19 on the sole ground that the judgment was against the weight of evidence.
The Appellant indicated an intention to file additional grounds of appeal upon receipt of the record of proceedings, with the leave of the court, but no such additional grounds have been filed. The parties shall retain their designation in the trial court.
Plaintiff’s Case:
The Plaintiff is a farmer and lives at Tuobodom near Techiman. The 1st Defendant Company is a key distributor of Unilever Co. Ltd products. The 2nd Defendant was at all times material to this case an employee i.e. a driver of the 1st Defendant Company in charge of the 1st Defendant’s vehicle a Mercedes Benz truck with registration No.AW 9786 -10 which ran over the leg of the Plaintiff in a motor accident.
Plaintiff avers that on 25/1/2014 while on her way to attend a church programme at Techiman at the intersection (Traffic Lights) near the Techiman Palace she was knocked down by the Mercedes Benz Truck with the registration number AW 9786-10 owned by 1st Defendant and driven by 2nd Defendant.
The Plaintiff averred that on making an attempt to cross the road and without her leg touching the road she realized suddenly that she was under the Mercedes Benz Truck, in question, driven by the 2nd Defendant. The 2nd Defendant, the driver did not realize he had knocked down the Plaintiff until onlookers, i.e. other pedestrians, started shouting and signaling him (the 2nd Defendant driver) to stop. The Plaintiff avers that the 2nd Defendant was negligent in negotiating the curve from the Kumasi Lorry Station heading towards Sunyani.
She provided the particulars of negligence against the 2nd Defendant as follows:
(i) That the 2nd Defendant failed to look out for pedestrians crossing the road before he negotiated the curve.
(ii) The 2nd Defendant failed / refused to exercise that duty of care he owed to other road users.
It is the case of Plaintiff that she was rushed to the Holy Family Hospital, Techiman where she was on admission for several months.
She therefore, brought an action for negligence against the Defendants at the Techiman Circuit Court.
Plaintiff averred that the 2nd Defendant was arraigned before th