BRIGHT ASANTE APPIA v. HUANG YUMIN

KWOFIE JSC:

This an appeal by the defendants/appellants (hereinafter referred to as the

1st defendant and 2nd defendant respectively) against the decision of the

Court of Appeal allowing in part, the appeal from the judgment of the High

Court, Tema dated the 12th day of April 2021. The judgment of the Court of

Appeal against which this appeal is brought was delivered on 19th October

The facts of the case are fairly simple and straight forward. The

plaintiff/respondent (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) is an employee of

Trio Courage Ltd, a Company situate within the light Industrial Area of

Community 9, Tema. The plaintiff’s place of work is situate on the same

street as the premises of the 2nd defendant company and within the same

enclave. The 1st defendant Huang Yumin, a Chinese national is an employee

of the 2nd defendant company and lives at the company’s premises. On the

27th March 2016, the plaintiff was returning home from work on foot using

the street linking plaintiff’s place of work to the main road along which is

situate the 2nd defendant company’s premises. Upon reaching the gate of the

2nd defendants company, the plaintiff saw a vehicle being driven by the 1st

defendant pull up at the gate and toot its horn. The plaintiff avers that

shortly after the gate was opened, two large foreign bred dogs emerged

from the premises and on seeing him, the dogs charged menacingly towards

him. The plaintiff, being apprehensive of the impending attack from the dogs

took to his heels for safety with the dogs in tow. The plaintiff while running

from the dogs fell heavily and sustained injuries and was taken to the Tema

General Hospital whereupon he was referred to the 37 Military Hospital

where he was admitted. It is for the injury sustained as a result of the attacks

by the 1st defendant’s dog and the expenses incurred by the plaintiff which

gave rise to the instant action by the plaintiff against the defendants wherein

the plaintiff claimed the following reliefs per his Writ of Summons:

a) The sum of GH¢9000.00 as special damages

b) General damages for the defendants negligence

c) General damages for injuries, pain and suffering, shock and loss of

income

d) Any other reliefs as in the circumstances may be just.

The 1st defendant admits ownership of the dogs in the Company’s yard on

the day of the incident but denies that the dogs came out of the Company’s

yard where they were kept and chased the plaintiff. The