Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
January 15, 1980
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
JUDGMENT OF OSEI-HWERE J.
The plaintiff’s claim against the defendants is for “a return of two printing blocks on swollen shoot or their value of ¢30,000.” In his amended statement of claim the plaintiff pleaded the following pertinent matters among others:
“(1) The plaintiff is a physiotherapist and naturopathic physician and doctor of botanic medicine, practising in Cape Coast, and the defendants, a daily newspaper corporation doing business all over the country and in Cape Coast, with headquarters in Accra.
(2) On 28 February 1972, the plaintiff despatched a block of healthy and unhealthy cocoa plants on swollen shoot, with an article on swollen shoot for publication for the public to know we have a man here to do the job, instead of asking from abroad; though not advert as it may mean.
(3) The defendant-corporation refused or failed to do the publication, and so the plaintiff called for the return of the two blocks, and despite repeated demands the blocks have not been returned to the plaintiff.
(4) On 7 October 1976, the editor in the person of Mr. I. K. Nkrumah wrote to say that the blocks had been misplaced and that plaintiff should send the art-work of the swollen shoot to enable them to make new blocks for replacement.”
From the evidence of the plaintiff it was actually a two-in-one block on swollen shoot that he despatched together with his article for publication, and he tendered in evidence as exhibit A the print impression of the blocks. Before the editor of the defendants-corporation came to write the letter mentioned in paragraph (4) of the statement of claim, the plaintiff had written to the then Head of State, General I. K. Acheampong, complaining about the defendants’ attitude of nonchalance towards the article he had sent for publication and also about their failure to return his blocks. His copy of the letter to the then Head of State is exhibit C and the letter from the [p.836] editor, Mr. I. K. Nkrumah, exhibit D. This letter from the editor is worthy to be quoted in full and it ran:
“Dear Sir,
SWOLLEN SHOOT BLOCK HEALTHY AND UNHEALTHY COCOA TREE
We refer to your letter of 21 July 1976 addressed to the office of the Supreme Military Council on the above-mentioned subject-matter and regret to inform you that the two printing blocks on swollen shoot referred to have been misplaced.
We are therefore asking you to send us copy of the art-work of the swollen shoot to enable us make new blocks to replace the missing ones.
You w
AI Generated Summary
Rowland M. Bright, a physiotherapist and naturopathic physician in Cape Coast, sued the Daily Graphic corporation to recover two printing blocks concerning cocoa swollen shoot or their value (¢30,000). In 1972 he sent an article and materials for publication; after years of inaction and correspondence, Editor I. K. Nkrumah wrote that the blocks had been misplaced and requested artwork to make replacements. The newspaper later published part of Bright’s article with pictures and offered a replacement block, which Bright rejected as bogus. A subsequent letter asserted the corporation had only received specimen artwork, not blocks. Justice Osei‑Hwere evaluated whether any cause of action lay, focusing on detinue and bailment. Applying established tort principles, the court held that, absent contract, the defendants as involuntary bailees owed no duty to deliver and are not liable in detinue for mere loss. Bright’s lack of candour and failure to assist valuation further undermined his claim. The action was dismissed with costs.