ANDREW SETH YAO NUKPE VS US GROUP OF COMPANIES LTD
2015
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP, JUSTICE DOREEN G. BOAKYE- AGYEI
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
2015
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Plaintiff filed suit against the Defendant seeking various reliefs related to two investment agreements, one for cash investment and another for tilapia investment. Initial judgment in default was set aside. The Defendant failed to appear in trial after filing the Statement of Defense, leading the court to rely solely on the Plaintiff's evidence. The Plaintiff's agreement guaranteed double returns on investment, which the Defendant denied but provided no evidence to support their claims. Citing multiple legal precedents, the court upheld the Plaintiff's claims and awarded the specified amount, interest, and costs based on the evidence and applicable contractual and evidentiary principles.
As is always the case, the Plaintiff sued the Defendant on 23/01/2014, claiming the reliefs endorsed on the Writ of Summons. The reliefs as endorsed on the Writ of Summons for which the Plaintiff claimed against the Defendant were as follows:
1. Recovery of the sum One Hundred and Sixty Thousand Ghana Cedis (GHC 160,000.00) representing the outstanding principal and interest due under the 1st Agreement dated the 14th of February, 2013.
2. Interest on the sum of One Hundred and Sixty Thousand Ghana Cedis (GHC 160,000.00) at the agreed default interest rate of 4% per month from the 14th of August, 2013 till the date of final payment.
3. Recovery of the sum One Hundred and Fifty-Six Thousand Two Hundred and Forty Ghana Cedis (GHC 156,240.00) due under the 2nd Agreement dated the 19th of December, 2012.
4. Interest on the sum One Hundred and Fifty-Six Thousand Two Hundred and Forty Ghana Cedis (GHC 156,240.00) at the prevailing commercial banking rate of 36% per annum from the 19th of December, 2012 till the date of final payment.
5. Legal fees and costs.
The matter has had a colorful and checked history in that a Judgment in Default of Appearance was entered for the Plaintiff against the Defendant on 13/02/2014, and the Plaintiff sought to go into Execution, whereupon the Defendant surfaced and applied successfully to have the Ruling set aside on 12/05/2014. The Defendant filed his Statement of Defense pursuant to the court order on 22/05/2014. On 21/08/2014, portions of the Defense so filed were struck out, and judgment was entered for the Plaintiff on his Reliefs a and b as endorsed on his Writ of Summons.
The sole issue set down for trial by the Pre-Trial Judge was whether or not the Plaintiff is entitled to his Reliefs as set out in Reliefs c, d, and e. The Defendant, having been duly served, did not turn up in court after the Plaintiff testified for cross-examination, after which the Plaintiff closed his case. The Defendant then failed to appear in court in spite of several hearing notices to give their own testimony at the trial.
The facts of the case and the Plaintiff’s evidence merge as he was the sole person who gave evidence. The Plaintiff’s case was that he knew the Defendant Company and had two different types of investment with them, being tilapia investment and cash investment. He had already obtained judgment on the cash investment on 21/08/2014. For the second investment, which was tilapia investment, it was for the sum of GHC 78,