CHRISLINE FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD v. ROSE OMABOE
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE KWEKU T. ACKAAH-BOAFO
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Commercial Law
- Banking and Finance Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Chrisline Financial Services sued its customer, trading as Naa Abekan Lube & Energy, to recover indebtedness arising from four loan facilities granted in late 2006. The facilities—GH¢10,000, GH¢6,600, GH¢15,000, and GH¢45,000—were approved with monthly interest (6% for the first two and 5% for the latter two) and short repayment schedules, secured by land at Dome, Accra. The funds were intended as working capital to buy LPG from Engen Ghana Ltd. Despite demand notices and a court-ordered audit, the Defendant failed to attend trial or participate in the audit, maintaining in pleadings that interest was per annum and seeking accounts. Applying Order 36 of CI 47 and the Evidence Act, the court accepted the Plaintiff’s uncontradicted documentary evidence and the referee’s report, dismissed the defence and counterclaim, entered judgment for GH¢286,569.60 with interest at the prevailing commercial bank rate from March 1, 2010, and awarded costs of GH¢15,000.
JUDGEMENT
i. Introduction:
[1] The Plaintiff Company, Chrisline Financial Services is a Company registered under the laws of Ghana and engages in the business of providing financial services to its customers. The Plaintiff contends that it granted the Defendant who is a Customer and trades under the business name Naa Abekan Lube & Energy various loan facilities for her business pursuant to a loan application by the Defendant. The Plaintiff contends the Defendant has breached the terms of the agreement. The issues for my resolution in this case include:
(i) whether or not the rate of interest on the various loan facilities granted to the Defendant on the 18th of October, 2006 and 23rd November 2006 respectively was 6% per month, or 6% per annum,
(ii) whether or not the rate of interest on the various loan facilities granted to the Defendant on the 6th of December, 2006 and 11th December 2006 respectively was 5% per month, or 5% per annum; and
(iii) whether or not the Defendant has been aware of the status of her account at all material times.
In effect, the Court is to determine whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs endorsed on the Writ of Summons.
[2] The Plaintiff’s Writ of Summons and the Statement of Claim issued on March 11, 2010 was for the following reliefs:
(A) Payment of the overdue sum of GH¢345, 741.17 being the consolidated debt on account of several loan facilities granted by Plaintiff to the Defendant as at 22nd February 2010.
(B) Interest on the said outstanding amount at the agreed rate of 5% per month from 23rd February 2010 to date of final payment.
AND/OR in the alternative
(C) The judicial sale of the collateral securities; the landed properties situated at Dome in Accra subject matter of indenture No. AR/2113/96 and LV3826/96.
(D) Costs.
(E) Any further orders.
[3] Upon the service of the Writ of Summons on the Defendant she entered Appearance through her lawyers Zoe, Akyea and Co on the 4th of June 2010. The Defendant’s lawyer however withdrew as Solicitor for the Defendant on the 9th of February 2012 but subsequently re-filed as appointed lawyers for the Defendant on 27th July 2012. The record shows that The Defendant filed her Statement of Defence on the 29th of September 2010 and counterclaimed against the Plaintiff as follows;
(i) A declaration that and concerning the monies advanced to the Defendant by the Plaintiff, the exigible interest was and is 6% per annum and not 6% per month.
(ii) An order