Court rules in favour of mother, son left homeless by traffic accident

The High Court has ruled in favour of a mother and her son in a negligence case involving a motor vehicle accident that resulted in personal injury and property damage in 2014.

Yvette Ramsahai and her son, Aquil, sought damages from Denzil Toppin, the driver of TBB-3611 and its owner Anthony Rocke, after it collided with a concrete wall at the family’s home in Morvant on December 4, 2014.

In deciding the case, Justice Joan Charles ordered Rocke to pay the Ramsahai's special damages and general damages to be assessed by a master.

At the time of the accident, Aquil, a 15-year-old student of Tunapuna Government Secondary School, was in the yard when the vehicle struck him after crashing through the concrete wall and through the house. He was pinned between a standpipe and the vehicle, and suffered multiple injuries, including a right lung pneumothorax (air leaking into the space between the lung and chest wall) and other severe abrasions and fractures.

His mother witnessed the horrifying incident and herself suffered injuries which meant she had to miss work. The destruction of the family’s home also left them homeless.

In their lawsuit, attorneys for the mother and son argued the accident was caused by Toppin’s reckless and negligent driving by excessive speed, loss of control and failure to apply brakes.

The attorneys argued that the mere occurrence of the accident was sufficient enough to imply negligence.

In his defence, Rocke tried to shift liability to an ancillary party, Kenneth Gabriel, to whom he had allegedly sold the vehicle under an instalment agreement.

He filed a counterclaim against Gabriel, who was ordered to indemnify him against any damages, costs and interest awarded against him in the case.

Rocke had claimed Gabriel took possession of the vehicle and employed Toppin without his permission.

In her ruling, Charles found inconsistencies in Rocke’s testimony, and said she had formed the view he fabricated evidence to buttress his claim he told Gabriel no one apart from himself could drive the vehicle as part of the sale agreement.

She also said Rocke’s credibility was further undermined by a conflict of evidence over when possession was passed on to Gabriel, since the insurance policy still listed him as the primary driver. She said the evidence led her to believe Rocke knew Toppin was the driver.

“On the totality of the evidence before me, it is clear that Rocke accepted that until Gabriel paid in full for the said vehicle, he retained ownership of it and the insurance policy still listed him as the primary driver.

“He was also aware that when he gave possession of the vehicle to Gabriel the issue of insurance coverage for the driver had to be secured; he proceeded to provide insurance coverage for himself and Gabriel.

“If he intended that no one else drive the vehicle, he could have included this term in the written agreement for sale or deferred transfer of the said vehicle until the full price had been paid.”

Charles found Rocke vicariously liable for Toppin’s negligence. She also noted that judgment in default had been granted against Toppin in February 2019.

Attorneys Yaseen Ahmed and Tara Lutchman represented the Ramsahais. Lemuel Murphy and Keishel Grant represented Rocke.