FRANK TAWIAH v. BIEGE CAPITAL
2019
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- MARIAMA OWUSU (MRS.), J.A. (PRESIDING)
- DZAMEFE, J. A.
- WELBOURNE (MRS), J. A
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Commercial Law
- Civil Procedure
2019
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Plaintiff took a GH₵10,000 loan from Defendant, secured with a Toyota Hiace and defaulted after an accident. Defendant seized a different vehicle without a court order. Plaintiff sued for wrongful seizure, recovery of vehicle, and damages. High Court ruled in favor of Plaintiff but awarded GH₵15,000 in damages, prompting an appeal. The appeal argued insufficiency of damages. Court analyzed evidence and doctrine. Concluded loan was GH₵10,000, secured with one vehicle. Affirmed High Court’s damages as fair. Denied specific damages for lack of proof. Concluded Plaintiff couldn't substantiate GH₵90/day loss claim. Appeal dismissed entirely.
JUDGMENT
MARGARET WELBOURNE (MRS.) JA.
BRIEF FACTS: This appeal is mounted against the judgment of the High Court Commercial Division) dated 27/5/2015
The facts of this case according to the Plaintiff are that, the Plaintiff took a loan facility of GH₵10,000.00 from the Defendant and he was to repay same within a period of Six (6) months. The facility was secured with the Plaintiff’s Toyota Hiace (Commercial Vehicle) numbered AE 1938-12. The Plaintiff managed to pay GH₵1,200.00 and as a result of an accident, one of his vehicles got burnt and so he defaulted in repayment of the loan as scheduled. Even though the Plaintiff used his Commercial Vehicle numbered AE 1938-12 as security for the loan the Defendant forcefully and without a Judgment or Court Order took away the Plaintiff’s vehicle with registration number AE 1879 -12 on November 1st 2013 and same has been with the Defendant till date. According to the Plaintiff, the said vehicle which was for Commercial use, was making daily sales of Ninety Ghana Cedis (GH₵90.00). Aggrieved by the wrongful seizure of his vehicle, the Plaintiff issued a Writ of Summons and a Statement of Claim from the registry of the High Court, Commercial Division, Kumasi seeking the following reliefs:
1. A declaration that theseizure of the Plaintiff’s Commercial Nissan Urvan bus with registration number AE 1879-12 on the 1st November, 2013 was wrongful.
2. An Order for recovery of possession of the Plaintiff’s said vehicle or in the alternative the recovery of the sum of GH₵35,000.00 being the value of the said vehicle.
3. An Order compelling the Defendant to repair the Plaintiff’s vehicle should same be found in a state of disrepair at the time of recovery of its possession.
4. An Order for recovery of GH₵90.00 per day from 1st November, 2013 till date of recovery of possession being loss of use of same for that period.
5. Damages for wrongful seizure.
On the service of the Writ of Summons on the Defendant they caused their solicitors to enter an appearance and subsequently filed their defence to the Plaintiff’s claim.
The matter was referred to a pre-trial judge to enable the parties settle the issues between them.
Unfortunately the pre-trial settlement failed for which reason the following issues were set down for trial:
i. Whether or not the Plaintiff took a loan of GH₵10,000 from the Defendant.
ii. Whether or not the Plaintiff secured the loan with these two Commercial buses.
iii. Whether or not the Plain