AFRICAN AUTOMOBILE LTD. v. MINISTRY OF INFORMATION - ACCRA & ANOR

OFOE, J.A:

The claim of the plaintiff that was virtually undefended at the trial court was a claim for an amount of GH¢14,174,693.12 being services rendered to the defendant. The services were in the nature of sale and or servicing and repairs on the vehicles of the defendant. At the close of trial there was no dispute that the claim was in respect of outstanding repair and servicing charges. By the plaintiff’s pleadings, the servicing was governed by a credit facility offered to the defendant which was originated by a letter of the defendant, MH\AA\97\5337 dated the 27th of January 1997. By the said credit facility agreement payment for services were to be made not later than the 15th of the following month. It is plaintiff’s case that the acceptance of the understanding to operate this credit facility was made by the defendant on the 4th of February 1997. There has been default on the part of the defendant to honour their payment obligations under this agreement leading to the claim earlier mentioned. It is worth noting that the period of payment of the interest the plaintiff endorsed on the writ was from date of judgment till date of final payment. It did not also state the rate of interest. Because the defendants initially did not file any defence judgment was entered for the amount endorsed on the writ based on Exh A. When the plaintiff filed their entry of judgment they sought for GH¢16,520,629.73 made up of GH¢14,174,693.12 principal and interest of GH¢2,205,936.59. By the entry of judgment the plaintiff calculated interest from 29th February 2008 till date of final judgment. This default judgment was eventually set aside and defence filed for the trial to be heard on its merits.

The plaintiff sought from the court an appointment of a referee. This order was granted appointing Mr Korley to go into accounts to determine the indebtedness of the defendant. It would appear Mr. Nketia who was earlier appointed as the referee was substituted by Mr. Korley on application by the plaintiff. The reasons the plaintiff sought for the order, as deposed to in their supporting affidavit, was for a reconciliation of accounts between it and the defendant since both parties have taken entrenched positions and have as a consequence not been able to reconcile their accounting differences. At the pre-trial conference, issues were settled for trial. It was agreed the court should try whether the parties had a subsisting credit agreement between them with any mode of