AGYEIWAAH & MERCY ENT. LTD VS SETHI BROTHERS GHANA LTD & ANOR
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE SOPHIA ROSETTA BERNASKO ESSAH (MRS.)
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Tort Law
- Civil Procedure
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case involves a dispute over a failed business transaction between two Ghanaian companies. The Plaintiff company paid GH¢44,550 to the 1st Defendant's account for iron rods but never received the goods. The Defendants claimed they refunded the money to an "Alhaji" they believed was the Plaintiff's representative. The court found that the Defendants failed to prove they made a legitimate refund and acted negligently in paying out cash without proper verification. The court held the 1st Defendant vicariously liable for the 2nd Defendant's actions and ordered a refund of the full amount plus interest to the Plaintiff. The case highlights principles of burden of proof in civil cases, vicarious liability, and the importance of proper verification in business transactions.
On the 9th of June 2010, Plaintiffs herein commenced the instant action against the Defendants. By an amended writ of summons filed on 31st May 2013, the Plaintiffs claimed the following reliefs against the Defendants: a. An order directed at the 1st and 2nd Defendants jointly and severally to pay the amount of GH¢44,550 which Plaintiff paid and/or deposited to 1st Defendant’s account for the supply of 45 tons of iron rods b. Interest on the said amount at the prevailing bank rate from April 2010 till date of final payment c. Cost including counsel’s cost. Plaintiffs allege that they are a limited liability company registered under the laws of Ghana and engaged in retailing of cement, iron rods, and other building materials whilst 1st Defendant is a limited liability company registered under the laws of Ghana and engaged in manufacturing of iron rods. That 2nd Defendant is an employee of the 1st Defendant. Plaintiffs allege further that sometime in 2009 officers of the 1st Defendant approached them for the purpose of establishing business relationship with them for the purchase of iron rods from the 1st Defendant. That they then started transacting business with the 1st Defendant. That the mode of transaction was by Plaintiff making payments into the bank account of 1st Defendant at Barclays Bank for the quantity of iron rods they wish to purchase and Defendant supplying them with same via a truck dispatched to defendants premises in Tema by Plaintiff. That the transactions with the Defendants were mainly by communication on the telephone with officials of the 1st Defendant. Pursuant to this arrangement, Plaintiff was supplied with 50 tons of iron rods at a sum of GH¢46,500.00 on 29th May 2009 and again of 20 tons at a cost of GH¢27,000 on the 29th of July 2009. That in April 2010 an official of the 1st Defendant telephoned and informed them that there was an imminent price increase of the 1st Defendant products and that it was advisable to make an advance purchase in order not to be affected by the proposed price increase. That on 9th April 2010 Plaintiff deposited and/or paid GH¢44,550 to 1st Defendant through 1st Defendant bank Account for 30 tons of 11.50X 30mm and 15 tons of 14x 30mm. That the next day an official of the 1st Defendant requested evidence of payment to the bank and directed that Plaintiff should fax a copy of the pay-in slip to a particular fax number attention one Mary. The official who spoke on phone to Plaintiff’s officers confirmed