AGVAD GHANA LTD. v. TRADING MEDICAL SYSTEMS PRIVATE
2019
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- D. ADJEI, JA (PRESIDING)
- A. LOVELACE-JOHNSON JA
- B. ACKAH-YENSU, JA
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
2019
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
On 6th February 2018, the high court refused to strike out the respondent's statement of claim, leading to the present appeal. The appellants argued that the statement did not disclose a reasonable cause of action and that the respondent lacked the locus to bring the action. The court held that as long as the case required arguments on serious points of law or evidence to resolve issues, it should not be struck out. Several cases and Order 11 rule 18(1)(a) of CI 47 support this view. The appeal was dismissed, allowing the case to proceed to trial.
AVRIL LOVELACE-JOHNSON (JA):
On 6th February 2018, the commercial division of the high court refused the appellant’s application to strike out the respondent’s statement of claim on the ground that it disclosed “no cause of action” against them.
It is this refusal that has caused the appellants to launch the present appeal on the following grounds
(a) That the learned High Court Judge erred when he held that he could not grant the application unless he saw the evidence Plaintiff intended to rely on in the trial
(b) That the learned High Court Judge erred when he held that he would not dwell so much on agency and its principles in determining the application.
They seek from this court a setting aside of the High Court’s ruling and an order striking out the statement of claim in question on the ground that it discloses no cause of action against them.
No additional grounds were filed.
Order 11 rule 18(1)(a) of CI 47 under which the application was brought states as follows
18. (1) The Court may at any stage of the proceedings order
any pleading or anything in any pleading to be struck
out on the grounds that
a) it disclose no reasonable cause of action or defence.
The pleading which the appellant seeks to have struck out is the plaintiff’s statement of claim which states as follows
1. Plaintiff is a company registered under the laws of Ghana and engages in the business of medical equipments.
2. Defendant is a company registered under the laws of Jordan and engages in the business of medical equipments
3. Plaintiff avers that it has had a mutually beneficial relationship with a third party entity called Belstar Development Ltd based in the US but with an office presence in Accra
4. Plaintiff further avers that in or around November 2011 Belstar Development Ltd was awarded a contract by the Ministry of Health of Ghana for the supply of various medical equipments for various hospitals in the Country including Korle bu Teaching Hospital, Accra
5. Under the contract, Belstar Development Limited sought a credit facility to pre-finance the purchase and supply of the medical equipments on behalf of Ministry of Health for onward distribution to selected hospitals across the country.
6. Plaintiff avers that owing to the mutually beneficial business relationship between it and Belstar Development Ltd, it introduced the latter to various suppliers of medical equipments which included Toshiba, Fuji Film, and Shimadzu Ltd for the purposes of procu