BAKARE V. JELKH

• Pages: 124-127

124



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[19681 N.S.C.C.

apply for leave to appeal and leave to appeal, but agreed with the contention that

the judgment of Sowemimo J. could not be supported. In the circumstances there

will, therefore, be no order as to costs on this appeal.

Appeal allowed: Judgment of High

Court set aside: Matter remitted to



5

High Court to give judgment

determining the appeal.

10

BAKARE V. JELKH

1.

ASHIRU BAKARE

2.

MESSRS G. CAPPA LTD

V

ALFRED JELKH

APPELLANTS

RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. SC 239/66

15

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA



20

BRETT,



J.S.0

LEWIS,



J.S.C.

MADARIKAN,



J.S.C.

3rd May, 1968.

25

Negligence - Motor vehicle - Damages for negligent driving - Liability - Res ipsa

loquitor - Onus on appellant to show trailer properly fastended - No evidence

of latent defect - Not necessary to call doctor to prove medical expenses

where doctors receipt available - Plaintiff to act reasonably to reduce damages

but not necessarily to take course least advantageous to himself - Damages



30

for loss of use of car only for period necessary to obtain new car.

ISSUES:

1. Whether a plaintiff who fails to act reasonably by minimising his damages, can

recover

a

sum greater than the one he would have recovered if he had acted



35

reasonably.

Though a plaintiff ought to act reasonably to reduce damages, must he take

the course least advantageous to himself.

3. Whether it is necessary to call a doctor to prove medical expenses where the

doctor's receipt is available.



40

As the plaintiff was driving his car along the Marina, Lagos, a Jeep approached

him from the opposite direction, towing a trailer with a big motor-boat on it. The

trailer and motor-boat suddenly detached from the Jeep and struck the front of the

plaintiff's car injuring the plaintiff and damaging his car. The plaintiff sued the



45

driver and his employer, the owner, in negligence. The defence denied negligence

and pleaded inevitable accident. The trial judge gave judgment for the plaintiff

and awarded damages for his personal injuries and car damage. The defendants

appealed against the finding of liability, and submitted that the doctor who treated

the plaintiff ought to have been called to prove the medical expenses.



50