Mphepo v Safeguard Security Services (Civil Cause No.422 of 2005) ((Civil Cause No.422 of 2005)) [2005] MWHC 87 (01 September 2005);

Share

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAWI

LILONGWE DISTRICT REGISTRY

CIVIL CAUSE No.422 OF 2005

BETWEEN

DAVID KENNETH MPHEPO ...….………………………………………… PLAINTIFF

AND

SAFEGUARD SECURITY SERVICES …………………………………. DEFENDNAT


Coram: T.R. Ligowe : Assistant Registrar

Tambulasi : Counsel for the Plaintifff

Msiska (Miss): Court Clerk


ORDER ON ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES

The plaintiff commenced action on 29th April 2005 against the defendant claiming damages for lost items which included an Aiwa Radio, Panasonic DVD player, Samsung VCR, Arm Star Decoder, K7 000 cash and a traveling bag containing important files and documents. The facts as pleaded in the statement of claim are that the defendants were at all material times a security services provider at the flat the plaintiff is a tenant at Area 6 in the City of Lilongwe. The defendants had employed Alick James as a security guard. On or about 8th October 2004 Alick James Stole or caused to be stolen the items belonging to the plaintiff. That the loss was caused by the defendant’s negligence in employing a thief as a guard without verifying his personal details. A judgment for damages to be assessed was entered in default of notice of intention to defend. This is the assessment of the damages.


The defendants having not appeared on the date appointed for the assessment of the damages despite due notice of the same and the defendants having not communicated as to the reason for the non attendance, the court proceeded in their absence.


In his evidence the plaintiff confirmed the facts pleaded in the statement of claim. He told the court that he had securely locked his flat before he went to bed only to realise early in the morning that the items listed were missing. His flat was being guarded by the defendant’s guard. In the course of investigations that very morning he found the guard’s uniform trousers outside the gate beside the brick wall. And there was a remote control for his DVD player on top of the trousers. The plaintiff tendered in evidence a quotation for some of the items from Consumer Electronic Services which was marked EXP1. The DVD player is quoted at K79 950, VCR K52 950 and Aiwa Hi-fi K79 950. He told the court he was not able to get a quotation for the Decoder but he had bought it at K25 000.


The damages to be awarded to the plaintiff in this case should be the value of the lost items. The quotation tendered shows the market value of the lost items. I award the plaintiff K249 850 as damages for the lost items plus costs of the action.


Made in chambers this ……. Day of September 2005.



T.R. Ligowe

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR