The mere fact that the fare was not paid by the respondent cannot, in my view, change the character of the contract. It remained throughout a contract to convey the respondent in the insured’s motor-car as “a passenger for reward.”
ROYAL EXCHANGE ASSURANCE v. OWUSU [1965] GLR 490 [1965] SLR (SC) 52 · Supreme Court · 1965 · MILLS-ODOI JSC
Read it in the judgment