NEOPLAN (GHANA) LTD
V.
HARMONY CONSTRUCTION CO LTD
(1996) JELR 63784 (HC) 
High Court · 14 May 1996 · Ghana
·
·
Other Citations
[1995-96] 1 GLR 662 CORAM
BENIN JA Ratio Decidendi
Upgrade required to show details Core Terms Beta
plaintiff
defendant
vehicle
repairs
transport maschinen
warranty
job card
contract
parties
plaintiff’s workshop
damaged vehicle
defendant’s vehicle
principals of the plaintiff
respect of ifa trucks
said repairs
technical report
agent of transport maschinen
cost of repairs
estimate of repairs of the vehicle
plaintiff’s case
total cost of repairs
cases of salvage
contract of bailment
contractual relationship
defendant company’s vehicle
defendant’s truck
direction of messrs transport maschinen export
esher mr
exceptional cases
existing contract
following cases
following issues
following reliefs
j k aidoo
known course of dealing
lord halsbury
material facts
mr abass
mr abass’ relevant evidence
mr scharm of transport maschinen
plaintiff’s representative
repair work
request of transport maschinen
said amount
said vehicle
sales service agreement
subject matter
BENIN JA.
The plaintiff sued the defendant claiming the following reliefs:
(a). “An order for the recovery of the sum of ¢4,293,604.22 being the total cost of repairs carried out on the defendant company’s vehicle.
(b). Interest at the rate of 30 per cent on the said amount from 14 April 1988 up to the date of final judgment.”
The plaintiff’s case as pleaded was that the defendant sent a vehicle to its workshop for repairs in April 1988. It carried out the repairs at a cost of ¢4,293,604.22. But the defendant has refused to settle the cost of repairs despite repeated demands made upon it to settle. Hence the reliefs sought.
The defence pleaded the following material facts, namely:
(i). “That it sent the vehicle to the plaintiff’s workshop upon the advice and direction of Messrs Transport Maschinen Export and Import (hereinafter called Transport Maschinen) who are the principals of the plaintiff in respect of IFA trucks (of which the defendant’s truck was one). The defendant was to inspect…
