EDWIN POKU VS SILVER STAR AUTO LIMITED & ANOR
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP BARBARA TETTEH-CHARWAY (J)
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Evidence Law
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Plaintiff, Edwin Poku, sued Silver Star Auto Ltd and Daimler Chrysler AG alleging the sale of a defective Mercedes Benz car causing him various inconveniences and costs. The court examined issues including fitness for purpose, whether the car was defective, and whether there was a manufacturer's defect. The court emphasized the plaintiff's burden to establish claims with credible evidence. After evaluating the evidence, the court found that the plaintiff failed to prove the existence of a latent defect and held that his rejection of the car was wrongful and void. The court also addressed the warranty period issue and the alleged agency relationship between the defendants but found no basis for the plaintiff's claims, resulting in judgment for the 1st defendant's counterclaims.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, Edwin Poku, a lawyer resident in Kumasi, brought this actionagainst defendants, Silver Star Auto Ltd, sole distributor of Mercedes Benzvehicles in Ghana and Daimler Chrysler AG, manufacturer of MercedesBenz vehicles, jointly and severally for the following reliefs; 1. The replacement of Mercedes Benz car E 200 Compressor 2. Damages and interest at the prevailing bank rate 3. Interest on the amount found to be due to plaintiff at the prevailing bank rate.
PLAINTIFF’S CASE Plaintiff’s case, as can be gleaned from his statement of claim, is that in2003, he entered into a contract with defendants for the sale and deliveryof a Mercedes Benz E class 200 to him.
At the time of the agreement, plaintiff claimed that he made defendants aware of the purpose for whichhe required the car.
According to plaintiff, defendants warranted that thecar was reliable, comfortable, durable and efficient; above all, that it wassuperior to others.
In the alternative, it was an implied condition of the contract between themthat the car was reasonably fit for its purpose.
He further claimed that herelied on defendant’s skill and judgment.
Plaintiff asserted that defendants breached the conditions and warrantiesof the contract between them by selling to him a car that was notreasonably fit for the purpose required.
He alleged that the vehicle turned out to be unfit and defective, as a resultof which he was compelled to rent a car at $150 per day whenever he sentit to defendant’s workshop for repair.
He gave particulars of the defects as follows; a) Steering pump damagedb) Pulley and fan belt damagedc) Clutch System damagedd) Electrical System damagede) Headlamps discolouredf) Speedometer damagedg) Battery damaged h) Starter damaged i) Traffic Indicator System damaged Plaintiff claimed that he had suffered loss, damage, inconvenience andembarrassment as a result of the defect in the car.
In particular, he claimed that sometime in March 2007 the steering pump, clutch system, and other parts of the car got damaged while he wastraveling from Takoradi to Kumasi.
Again, in November 2007, after he had taken delivery of the car from thedefendant after repairs, the car suffered another breakdown in the middleof the road when plaintiff was travelling from Kumasi to Sunyani.
Additionally, in January 2008, a week after the defendant delivered thecar to him it suffered another breakdown at the High Court, Kumasi.
Hesent it to defendant for repairs where it remain