The first appellant entered into a contract with the respondent to airfreight a
consignment of chilled fresh fish. On arrival, the consignment was found to be
unfit, was rejected and destroyed. The second appellant indemnified the first
appellant as its insured for the loss. The first appellant instituted a suit against
the respondent for the benefit of the second appellant under the doctrine of
subrogation to recover the sum. The trial judge found that the goods were
damaged either during the process of loading them into the plane or during
the flight and blamed the respondent for causing the damage. Judgment was
entered for the second appellant. The respondent was dissatisfied with the
decision of the trial court, and appealed to the Court of Appeal, which allowed
the appeal, overturning the trial court's judgment. Hence this appeal.