Try asking the following...
JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff sued the Defendant, Electricity Company of Ghana Limited for the following
relief endorse, filed on the 26/7/2017;
i. General and special damages for negligence.
ii. Further or other relief the Honourable Court may deem fit.
Her story has it that, on the 21st day of June, 2015 during the off period of the load
shedding exercise, some workers of the Defendant Company (ECG) Ho came to her area
of residence to reconnect a transformer serving their customers who were without power.
According to her, whilst reconnecting power, there were several power outages which
resulted in a very high-power surges whenever the power is turned on, as a result of
which part of her house particularly her kitchen, storeroom and living room were
guttered with fire and several items were destroyed. She estimated the total value of
items destroyed at GH¢33,398.00 and $7,935.00.
According to her, she applied to the Ghana National Fire Service (GNFS), Ho and a report
on the fire was issued on 7th January, 2016. She immediately submitted the report to the
Defendant Company (ECG).
She continued that, though she was not at home when the incident occurred, she made
sure before she left home all electrical appliances were turned off. The only electrical
appliance that was on was her fridge. That the fridge was on because her area had light
that day.
She avers that her house was fitted with the best electrical cables. According to her all
electrical materials used for the wiring of the house including switches and sockets were
imported directly from the United Kingdom. That all installations were carried out in
accordance with British standards under the supervision of her husband – Dudly J. Piggot
who is a qualified Electrical Engineer. It is her story further that, her husband was
working with the Defendant on various projects in Ghana. That a protective device
manufactured by a renowned MK Electrical of the United Kingdom was installed in the
distribution board. Therefore, the damage caused to her property was largely due to the
negligence of the Defendant’s workmen who did not take effective measures whether by
inspection, examination or otherwise to ensure that there would be no risk of fire to other
households arising from the restoration of power to the transformer whilst they were
directly in the helm of affairs working on the transformer to restore power to other houses
whose supply of power was cut off when they were supposed to have