BLESSED YAKO LIMITED VS GHANA COCOA BOARD & ANOR
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE GEORGE BUADI J.
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Commercial Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The plaintiff, engaged in transiting waste cocoa beans, claimed a ban by 1st defendant violated ECOWAS protocol and caused profit loss. The court focused on whether the plaintiff had a valid cause of action and found that the plaintiff failed to prove any contract or agency to support its claims. The court also noted the lack of corroborative evidence for the alleged verbal agreements. The action was dismissed for lacking requisite capacity and right to sue, making any discussion on the merits academic.
1 Introduction Plaintiff claims to be into lawful business of transiting rejected or waste cocoa beans from Ivory Coast through Ghana to Togo, and that the Custom’s Unit of the Ghana Revenue Authority, the 2nd defendant herein has always given them escort through specific routes in transiting the cocoa beans through Ghana to Togo until 1st defendant per its Chief Executive issued a directive in 2007 to 2nd defendant that purportedly banned the transiting of rejected or waste cocoa beans by land from Ivory Coast to Togo through Ghana.
2 Plaintiff’s case Plaintiff claims to have been granted permit dated 18 October, 2007 to transit 153, 846 tons of cocoa beans from Ivory Coast through Ghana to Togo by road.
After transiting only 135 tons, 2nd defendant on the directive of 1st defendant stopped plaintiff from continuing with the remaining tons.
Plaintiff claims to have lost as a result potential profit of GH¢888, 108 on the remaining 153, 711 tons to be transported.
On 17 January and 13 March 2013 plaintiff claims to have written to 1st defendant for permission to transit 20, 000 metric tons of cocoa from Ivory Coast through Ghana to Togo, but 1st defendant did not bulge.
Plaintiff states that it would have made a further profit of GH¢337, 000. 00 from this transaction.
Plaintiff contends that, Ghana being a member of ECOWAS and a signatory to the ECOWAS Trade Liberalization Scheme (The Ecowas Protocol), the ban on transiting of rejected cocoa beans through Ghana is in breach of The Ecowas PROTOCOL) which recognizes free movement of goods and services within the West African sub-region.
Plaintiff avers that 1st defendant’s directive that plaintiff should use only the sea in transporting rejected cocoa beans and not by land was at the time it was acting as agent of Messrs Gracias-Togo for transiting 20, 000 metric tons of rejected cocoa beans from Ivory Coast through Ghana to Togo.
Plaintiff avers that 1st defendant’s directive, is unlawful and naked abuse of power, which has resulted in a great loss to its operations, and sues therefore for the following reliefs: (a) A declaration that the 1st defendant does not have the power to ban the plaintiff from transiting rejected cocoa beans through Ghana.
b) Damages for compensation from the 1st defendant in the sum of one million, two hundred and twenty five thousand, one hundred and eight (GH¢1, 225, 108) being the loss of revenue occasioned by the 1st defendant directives to the 2nd defendant banning tra