AMOFA KOFI KUSI v. UNICREDIT GHANA LIMITED
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- JUSTICE DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE, J
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
- Evidence Law
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
On 4th December, 2018, the plaintiff initiated a lawsuit against the defendant seeking the recovery of an investment of GHC291,208.35 with interest and other costs. Despite multiple attempts at settling and numerous court notices, the defendant failed to participate in the trial or comply with court orders. The court, invoking relevant procedural rules, allowed the plaintiff to prove his claim, who provided substantial evidence of attempts to redeem the investment and assurances from the defendant. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendant to repay the invested sum with interest of 20.5% since 11th August, 2017, and awarded GHC20,000 in costs to the plaintiff.
JUDGEMENT
On the 4th of December, 2018 the plaintiff instituted an action against the Defendant. By his writ of summons, the plaintiff sought the following reliefs:
a. The recovery of the total sum of suns of GHC291, 208.35 being a fixed deposit investment made by the Plaintiff with the Defendant on 11th August, 2017.
b. Interest on the sum of the contract rate of 20.50% from 11th August, 2017 till date of final payment.
c. Cost including cost of litigation.
d. Any further order that this Honorable Court may deem fit.
Appearance was entered on behalf of the Defendant by its solicitor on the 6th of December, 2018 and a statement of defense was also filed on behalf of the defendant on 19th December, 2018.
On 20th December, 2018 the plaintiff filed an amended writ of summons and statement of claim. The reliefs sought were the same as the original writ.
After unsuccessful attempts at settlement the following issues were set down for trial namely:
1. Whether or not the Plaintiff’s investment was redeemed as at 15th October, 2017?
2. Whether or not the Plaintiff is entitled to his claim?
It is observed that per the Court’s records, the Defendant was duly served with hearing notices to attend court for the trial to commence but it failed to show up. This is evidenced by some of the affidavits of service sworn on 04/06/2019 and 06/06/2019.
The Defendant also failed to comply with the orders of the court to file its witness statements. The court consequently invoked Order 32 rule 7A of the High Court (Civil Procedure) (Amendment) Rules, 2014, CI 87 and struck out the defence of the Defendant.
With the continuous absence of the Defendant, the court had no option than to proceed with the case under order 36 rule 1(2)(a) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2004, CI 47. It states:
Rule 1(2) where an action is called for trial and a party fails to attend, the trial judge may;
a. Where the plaintiff attends and the defendant fails to attend, dismiss the counterclaim, if any, and allow the plaintiff to prove the claim.
On the basis of the rule, the Plaintiff was allowed to prove his claim on the 04/07/2019. He relied on the witness statement filed on behalf of the Plaintiff on 07/06/2019.
The plaintiff’s case is that he is a businessman and invested an amount of GHs291, 208.35 in a fix deposit with the Defendant Company at an interest rate of 20.50% on the 11th of August, 2017. That, sometime in August 2018, he went to see the Kejetia Branch manag