BANNOR OSEI v. NOBLE DREAM FINANCIAL SERVICES
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- ANGELINA MENSAH-HOMIAH (MRS.) JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
- Evidence Law
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Plaintiff invested GH¢22,100.00 with the Defendant for a fixed period, expecting repayment plus interest. The Defendant failed to settle the amount upon maturity prompting a lawsuit. Despite entering appearance, the Defendant did not engage in court proceedings, resulting in their defense being struck out. The Court ruled in favor of the Plaintiff, awarding him GH¢22,100.00 plus 10.50% interest from 13/11/2013 to 14/02/2014 totaling GH¢24,420.50, additional interest up to the date of judgment and post-judgment interest at prevailing rates, along with costs against the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
This court has been called upon to determine whether or not the Defendant herein owes the Plaintiff the sum of GH¢22,100.00 and interest thereon from February, 2014 till date of final payment.
In his statement of claim filed on 25/03/2015, the Plaintiff asserted that on 13th November, 2013, he invested an amount of GH¢ 22,100.00 for a fixed period of 91 days on the advice of the defendant at its Agona Branch on agreed terms. It is his case that upon maturity of the said investment, the defendant failed to repay his principal and the accrued interest. Hence, the instant action.
The defendant entered appearance per its lawyer who proceeded to file a defence. At the directions stage, orders were made for the filing of witness statements. Even though counsel for the defendant failed to attend court, an order was made for the courts notes relative to the filing of witness statements to be served on counsel. Subsequently, the plaintiff's witness statement was served on counsel for the defendant on 08/12/2015. A hearing notice was again served on counsel for the defendant on 03/12/2015 to attend court on 08/12/2015 for case management conference. As has been the trend, the defendant and its counsel failed to show up. The last hearing notice was served on defence counsel on 24/03/2016 for the 07/04/2016 hearing. When defence counsel and his client neglected to come to court, the defendant's defence was struck out in accordance with Order 32 rule
7A (3) (b) of C.I. 47 as amended by C.I. 87.
The onus of proof is on the plaintiff who is alleging that the defendant is indebted to him. Unless he is able to discharge this burden to the standard required by law, he cannot succeed. Put differently, the fact that the defendant elected not to participate in the trial does not mean that the plaintiff will get what he wants on a silver platter! He must proof same. He is expected to lead evidence from which the court can infer that his claim is more probable than not as required by sections 11(4), and 12 of the Evidence Act, 1975 NRCD 323.
As Brobbey JSC put it in Re Ashalley Botwe Lands; Adjetey Agbosu & Ors v Kotey & Ors ( 2003-
" ... A litigant who is a defendant in a civil case does not need to prove anything; the plaintiff who took the defendant to court has to prove what he claims he is entitled to from the defendant..."
At the trial, the plaintiff relied on his witness statement filed on 30/11/2015. In his evidence-in-chief, the plainti