EDUSEI v. DINERS CLUB SUISSE S.A.

JUDGMENT OF FRANCOIS J.A.

The Diners Club of Switzerland is "a body corporate incorporated and organised under the laws of Switzerland." That is how the writ describes the plaintiffs; and that description has not been controverted on the pleadings. The club provides credit cards to its members, who according to its constitution, must been of repute and of good financial standing. These cards enable their holders to enjoy credit facilities in many parts of the world, thus obviating the cumbersome necessity of carrying huge amounts of money about.

Mr Krobo Edusei, the defendant-appellant, hereafter called the appellant, does not deny enjoying these facilities as a member of the respondents' association. Indeed, a letter whose admissibility is pointlessly attacked in this appeal, demonstrates beyond doubt that the appellant made full use of the facilities offered to the tune of about 12,000 pounds sterling. It was his failure to meet the corresponding obligation of a good member, that is, of satisfying his debt, that he was sued.

The burden of Mr Edusei's complaint is that he had been wrongly sued in his person and in this jurisdiction. First, he contends that he was introduced to the club by a person who required his services, and was beholden to him. The arrangement was that this third party should shoulder responsibility for any debts he, Edusei, incurred; consequently liability should have been transferred to him. He urges further that the contract should have been performed in Zurich, so the matter was not justifiable by the courts in Ghana. These matters do not exhaust Mr Edusei' complaint. He sees a disparity between the claim and what the disputed letter of his said he owed. In these circumstances, he urges that the procedure afforded by Order 14 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (L.N. 140A), for summary judgment on liquidated claims should not be available to the respondents.

Again the affidavit in support of the application, sworn to by a Ghanaian solicitor who had no personal knowledge of the facts he attested thereto, he claims, is incompetent and subversive of the well-established rule in Accra Furniture and Rubber Foam Co., Ltd. v. Indart S.P./A. of Rome [1973] 2 G.L.R. 289, C.A. of the need for [P.813] personal knowledge. Finally he submits that the respondent company not being registered in Ghana, or doing business here, cannot issue a valid writ in Ghana.

Having enjoyed on a lavish scale, the services extended by the cl