Metro Mass Transit Ltd. v. Rev. Addai Kwarteng
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- Ayebi, J.A. (Presiding)
- Torkornoo (Mrs.), J.A.
- Domakyaareh (Mrs.), J.A.
Areas of Law
- Tort Law
- Civil Procedure
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case revolves around a collision between two buses, where the plaintiff sued for damages resulting from the defendant's alleged negligence. The trial court found the defendant negligent and awarded damages to the plaintiff. The defendant appealed, raising issues regarding the sufficiency of evidence and the trial court's findings on negligence and damages. The appellate court upheld the trial court's judgment, dismissed the appeal on negligence grounds, and only slightly varied the damages awarded, maintaining that damages should be an accurate reflection of the loss suffered. Legal principles discussed include the duty of care, the standard of the reasonable man, contributory negligence, and the burden of producing evidence.
TORKORNOO (MRS), J. A. The undisputed facts of this case are that the parties own buses and run them as commercial vehicles.
In the early hours of 15th February 2011, at about 2 am, their two buses were travelling along the Kumasi-Bawku road.
The bus of thePlaintiff/Respondent (hereafter referred to as the Respondent) was travellingtowards Nalerigu and the Defendant Appellant’s (hereafter referred to asAppellant) bus was travelling from Tamale.
At a section of the road nearOffinso-Ahenkro which was uphill, the Respondent’s bus burst a tyre, reversed, and fell onto its side in the road, thereby obstructing traffic.
It is after this that the cases of the parties begin to differ.
The Respondent’s caseis that some of the passengers got out of the bus with torch lights provided bytheir driver, to warn on coming vehicles about the accident.
An on-comingYutong bus was effectively warned and safely passed.
Then came theAppellant’s bus down the hill.
The torch bearers warned of the accident and yet, the Appellant’s driver run into the Respondent’s bus.
Like ships in the nightcolliding on the high seas, there was a toll of death and destruction.
The Appellant’s driver died, and five torchbearers died.
Nineteen peopleincluding the Respondent’s driver, were injured from the Respondent’s bus andspent time in hospital.
The Respondent’s bus driver and one of his passengers, and a second passenger from the Appellant’s bus lived to tell a harrowing tale inthe trial that followed which has led to this appeal.
The Respondent sued theAppellant for: 1. The sum of GH¢108, 500. 00 being special damages resulting from damage caused to his vehicle No. GR 5039 L through the negligentdriving of the Defendant’s driver who at the material time was the servantof the Defendant’s and was driving with its consent and approval ofvehicle No. AW 238 Z which was then owned by the Defendant thusrendering the Defendant vicariously liable.
2. General damages 3. Cost. The Appellant counterclaimed for: a. Special damages: 1. Recovery of GH¢38, 219. 00 as initial cost of repairs of the bus by Neoplan Ghana Limited after the accident.
2. Recovery of GH¢3, 673. 85 as subsequent repairs of the bus after the 1st accident.
3. GH¢500. 00 as cost of towing of the bus from the accident scene to the garage of Neoplan Ghana Limited.
4. GH¢3, 771. 18 being the payment of medical bills paid by the Defendant on behalf of the injured passengers on its bus.
5. GH¢1, 240. 00 a day for 50 day