BANK OF AFRICA GHANA LIMITED vs ISAAC AMPONSAH-POKU & ANOR

The Plaintiff is a limited liability company incorporated under the laws of Ghana and engaged in the business of banking.

The 1st Defendant is an employee of the 2nd Defendant, the guarantor of the facility of the subject matter of this suit and a customer of the Plaintiff bank.

The facts of the case as can be gleaned from the pleadings are that on the 22nd of June, 2012, the 1st Defendant applied for and was granted a personal loan in the sum of Thirty thousand Ghana cedis (Gh¢30, 000. 00) under the Plaintiff’s Employee Personal Loan Scheme (EPLS). The terms of the loan, as accepted by the 1st Defendant, were evidenced in a loan agreement to which he duly applied his signature (Exhibit “A”). The interest rate as per the agreement was 25% per annum subject to variation in line with the market trend.

Plaintiff avers that the facility was to attract a processing fee and a commitment fee of 1% respectively and an insurance fee of 1. 38%, all totalling One thousand and fourteen Ghana cedis (GH¢1, 014. 00). An interest of 6% per annum above normal interest was to be charged on any outstanding amount after payment became due as a penalty.

The facility was to expire after forty-eight (48) months from the date of disbursement and was to be repaid in forty-eight (48) equal monthly instalments and thereafter by post-dated cheques drawn on 1st Defendant’s account.

Plaintiff states that it was part of the conditions precedent that a corporate guarantee from the 2nd Defendant (the employer) should be submitted among others.

All these terms were duly complied with by the 1st Defendant as on the 18th June, 2012, the 2nd Defendant acting through its Chief executive officer, who is in the person of the 1st Defendant issued an unconditional guarantee in favour of the Plaintiff accepting liability for the 1st Defendant in the event that there is a default.

It is Plaintiff’s contention that when 1st Defendant subsequently defaulted on the payment despite repeated demands, a call was made on the 2nd Defendant to fulfil the obligation under the terms of the guarantee but they failed to make good on their promise.

Plaintiff further avers that as at June 30, 2016, the liability of the Defendants stood at Seventy-Nine Thousand, Nine Hundred and Seventy-Six Ghana cedis and Eighty-Seven pesewas (GH¢79, 976. 87) as evidenced by Exhibit “C”. Plaintiff therefore instituted this action against the Defendants jointly and severally for the following reliefs: a. The recovery of the