JUDGMENT
BROBBEY J.
In the plaintiff’s original writ of summons, he claimed:
“(a) ¢2.2 million being the cost of his Ford Transit bus with registration number ARC 5388; (b) general damages; (c) loss of use of the said vehicle at ¢8,000 per day from 5 October 1986 to the date of final judgment; and (d) incidental expenses totalling ¢11,350.”
The plaintiff amended his statement of claim before the commencement of the trial and in paragraph 11 of the amended statement of claim, he claimed only ¢2.2 million being the cost of the vehicle and loss of use from 5 October 1986 to the date of judgment at ¢8,000 per day. On top of these, the amended statement of claim ended with the statement “wherefore the plaintiff claims as per his writ of summons.” In effect, after amending the writ, the plaintiff re-claimed what he seemed to have amended. During the trial, the only evidence led on the reliefs related to the loss of use and cost of the vehicle. No evidence was led on the other heads of claim. Th…