SHELL COMPANY OF GHANA LTD. v. AYIMAVOR AND ANOTHER

JUDGMENT OF APALOO J.A.

Apaloo J.A. delivered the judgment of the court. The plaintiffs are the administrators of the estate of the late Madam Akle Ayimavor of Kopehe and Accra. The deceased met her death as a result of a lorry accident which took place at Hwakpo junction on 5 November 1967. According to the evidence, the deceased who carried a headload, was talking to the driver of a stationary lorry at the Hwakpo-Ada junction when a car driven by a European in the defendant company's employ emerged from the direction of Ada and violently struck her. Such was the force of the impact, that the car carried her on its bonnet for a number of yards and [p.53] eventually hurled her on to the ground. She suffered serious injuries from this and her end came shortly afterwards.

The plaintiffs therefore brought a suit against the company, under the Civil Liability Act, 1963 (Act 176), claiming damages under several heads. The plaintiffs based themselves on the fact that the company’s servant was negligent. The company denied this and in the alternative pleaded that the deceased was guilty of contributory negligence. At the trial, no evidence was led on behalf of the company and the learned judge accepting the plaintiffs' evidence, held that the company’s servant was negligent. He rejected the plea of contributory negligence raised by the company and mulcted the latter in damages aggregating the sum of N¢16,400 under various heads. The company contest that judgment by this appeal.

Mr. J. Quashie-Idun for the company argued that there was internal evidence from the plaintiffs' own case from which contributory negligence can be found and that the judge was in error inasmuch as he held otherwise. With respect, we find nothing in that contention. The facts of the accident were all one way and were related by the plaintiffs. They were virtually uncontradicted and ineffectively challenged. We find it impossible to hold on those facts that the deceased was in part the author of her own misfortune. On the contrary, we share the learned judge's conclusion that the company's servant was grossly negligent and was solely to blame for the accident. It follows that this ground of appeal fails.

The more serious contentions raised on behalf of the company were however on the quantum of damages and the basis on which some of the awards were made. The learned judge awarded the dependants of the deceased N¢650.00 for mental distress and proceeded to apportion it among her seven