Try asking the following...
RULING
Learned Counsel for 1st and 2nd Defendants has raised objections to the admissibility of the documents labelled as Exhibits ‘A’, ‘C’, ‘D’ and ‘E’ on the basis that these are instruments that are required to be stamped under the Stamp Duty Act. That the said Exhibits not having been stamped are inadmissible and ought to be rejected in evidence.
In respect of the document marked as Exhibit ‘B’, learned Counsel submitted that there is no jurat as there is no indication that 3rd Defendant had the benefit of the content of the said document being read to her before thumb printing same.
Learned Counsel for 3rd Defendant associated himself with the submissions by Learned Counsel for 1st and 2nd Defendants. He further submitted that the proposed Exhibit ‘B’ being an instrument is also required to be stamped in compliance in the Stamp Duty Act. That by virtue of it not having been stamped; it is inadmissible and so ought to be rejected in evidence.
I have taken a look at the said Exhibits which are as follows:
1. Exhibit ‘A’ is a copy of overdraft facility letter dated 10th May, 2018
2. Exhibit ‘B’ is a copy of a document titled “Consent to Mortgage”
3. Exhibit ‘C’ is a copy of a document titled “Deed of Assignment”
4. Exhibit ‘D’ is a copy of a document titled “Personal Guarantee”
5. Exhibit ‘E’ which is a copy of a document titled “Assignment of Stocks and Receivables”.
I must admit that the above stated proposed Exhibits being documents which seek to define or confer the rights and liabilities of the Parties to the suit qualify as instruments which require stamping in Order to be admissible in evidence in compliance with Section 32 of the Stamp Duty Act, 2005 (Act 689).
These documents not being stamped in compliance with the Stamp Duty Act are therefore inadmissible in evidence as was held in the Lizori Ltd v School of Domestic Sciences [2013-2014] 2 SCGLR 889.
The documents attached to the witness statement of Plaintiff’s representative, Ernest Sampson and marked as Exhibits ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’, ‘D’ and ‘E’ are hereby rejected in evidence and marked as ‘R’, ‘R1’, ‘R2’, ‘R3’ and ‘R4’ respectively.
The document marked as Exhibit ‘F’ which is a copy of a Demand Letter to Defendants by Plaintiff’s Counsel and dated 2nd March, 2020 is hereby admitted in evidence as Exhibit ‘A’.
The document marked as Exhibit ‘G’ which is a copy of 1st Defendant’s Account Statement with Plaintiff Bank dated 21st May, 2020 is admitted in evidence as Exhibit ‘B’.
The Co