AFRICAN DRUG CO. v. KUMASI CITY COUNCIL

JUDGMENT OF MENSA BOISON J.

By their writ of summons the plaintiffs claim against the defendants, the council, damages for wrongful ejectment and for loss in their business profits occasioned by the defendants' act. The substance of the statement of claim is that the plaintiffs, as importers and retailers of pharmaceuticals, had their office in store No. B4 in the Asafo Market, Kumasi, which they had rented from the defendants, forcibly locked up by a servant of the defendants, for alleged arrears of rents. According to the plaintiffs, this act prevented their having access to their files and documents. The documents including import licence for drugs, without which they were unable to take customs delivery of certain pharmaceutical consignments during the period. As a result of their failure, the drugs were eventually sold at a public auction by the Customs Department as unclaimed goods. Apart from the resulting loss of profits thereby occasioned, the plaintiffs also complain of having suffered damages for their inability to transact business from their office No. B4 as a result of the closure. For the loss the plaintiffs claim general damages, besides a claim for special damages of N¢10,308.20.

The defendants in the first place denied the material allegation of forcibly locking up the office of the plaintiffs. In the alternative they justified any such closure under the provisions of the council's Control of Markets Bye-Laws, which entitled them to revoke the plaintiff's licence as tenants, even without notice, for the arrears of rents. They also appeared to have denied any damage to the plaintiffs and counterclaimed for arrears of rents in the sum of N¢378.00.

The important issues settled for trial were:

(1) whether the plaintiffs were tenants or licensees;

(2) whether there was on or about 10 August 1968 a dispute as to the amount of rent owed by the plaintiffs;

(3) whether or not the defendants locked up the plaintiffs' office and if so whether the act was wrongful;

(4) whether or not the plaintiffs suffered damage; and

(5) whether or not there was any breach of the council's Control of Markets Bye-Laws, 1964.

There is no dispute upon the evidence that the plaintiffs at the material period, were tenants of the defendants occupying by licence, one market store No. B4 at the Asafo Market in Kumasi, that they were in arrears of rent by 10 August 1968. The amount which was later agreed to be N¢378.00 was paid by the plaintiffs after the instituti