Maame Efua was contracted by Mr Chimsi to carry her tomatoes from Navrongo Island to Accra, by train. When the train got to Techiman, the railway company’s employees were on strike and had destroyed part of the railway tracks. As a result, the train delayed for 5 days at Techiman during which time, some of the tomatoes were found to be bad. All efforts to reach Mr Chimsi on phone prove futile as the network was bad, the whole time Maame Afua was in Techiman. GSo, Maame Afua decided to sell the tomatoes as she thought that tomatoes could not arrive in Accra in a good and saleable condition. Mr Chimsi found out about this eventually, he is very angry and wants to claim damages from Maame Afua. As a seasoned Business Law student, the parties have come to you for advise on whether a. An agency relationship arose from those facts and if so which type of agency b. Will you answer to question (a) be the same if Maame Afua did not try reaching Mr Chimsi before selling off the tomatoes.

Based on the facts presented, it appears that an agency relationship arose between Mr. Chimsi and Maame Efua, as Mr. Chimsi contracted Maame Efua to transport his tomatoes from Navrongo Island to Accra. Maame Efua was acting as an agent of Mr. Chimsi when she agreed to transport the tomatoes and was responsible for ensuring that they arrived at their destination in good condition.

Regarding the type of agency, it is likely that Maame Efua was acting as a common carrier or a carrier for hire, which means she was providing transportation services to the general public and had a duty to transport the goods safely and without delay. However, the specific type of agency relationship may depend on the terms of the contract between Mr. Chimsi and Maame Efua.

With regards to Mr. Chimsi’s claim for damages, it is possible that Maame Efua breached her duty as an agent by selling the tomatoes without Mr. Chimsi’s permission. If it can be shown that Maame Efua acted negligently or breached her duty of care as an agent, she may be liable for damages. However, the specific extent of damages would depend on the specific facts of the case and the terms of the contract between Mr. Chimsi and Maame Efua.

If Maame Efua did not try to reach Mr. Chimsi before selling off the tomatoes, this would not change the fact that an agency relationship existed between them. However, it may affect the specific nature of Maame Efua’s liability for damages, as it could be argued that she did not take reasonable steps to mitigate the damage caused by the delay and the bad tomatoes. Again, the specific facts of the case would determine the extent of Maame Efua’s liability.

Answer to Question a: Yes, an agency relationship arose from those facts. Maame Efua was acting as an agent for Mr. Chimsi when she agreed to transport his tomatoes from Navrongo Island to Accra. The specific type of agency relationship between them would depend on the terms of the contract between them, but it is likely that Maame Efua was acting as a common carrier or a carrier for hire, which means she had a duty to transport the goods safely and without delay.

Answer to Question b: The answer to question (a) would not be affected by whether or not Maame Efua tried reaching Mr. Chimsi before selling off the tomatoes. Even if Maame Efua did not attempt to contact Mr. Chimsi, she was still acting as his agent and had a duty to act in his best interests. Therefore, if she sold the tomatoes without Mr. Chimsi’s permission and it can be shown that she breached her duty of care as an agent, she may be liable for damages. However, the specific extent of damages would depend on the specific facts of the case and the terms of the contract between Mr. Chimsi and Maame Efua