EDWARD OPPONG AFRIYIE v. TOTAL PETROLEUM GH LTD
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- SENYO DZAMEFE, J.A. (PRESIDING)
- NICHOLAS C. AGBEVOR, J.A.
- JENNIFER A. DODOO, J.A
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Ghana Court of Appeal decision, authored by Jennifer A. Dodoo, J.A., concerns Edward Oppong Afriyie’s claim that Total Petroleum Ghana Limited treated him as a dealer at its Motorway 1 service station after dealer Stephen Hagan died in July 2016. Oppong Afriyie sought GH92,228.41 in commissions and GH9,193.64 from shop profits, asserting an unwritten dealership. Total countered that he served only as caretaker and continued receiving monthly salary, citing a caretaker account and salary vouchers (Exhibits C and 1). On appeal, the Court reheard the case under Rule 8(1) and found he had not met conditions to be appointed dealer nor proven the sums claimed. It held that caretakers are distinct from dealers and cannot both earn salary and dealer commissions. The Court set aside the trial court’s awards but directed payment of GH33,795.19 that Total had offered as goodwill, without interest.
DODOO, JA (MRS)
BACKGROUND TO THE APPEAL
The Plaintiff/Respondent’s case is that he was employed as a General Manager for one of Defendant/Appellant’s dealers. On the death of the said dealer, he continued working for the Appellant as a dealer under an unwritten dealership’s contract.
It was his case that every dealer earned commission both on supplies to the station and from profits of the management of shops after the deduction of rents and costs. In his estimation, between July 2016 and 31st October, 2016 he should have been paid a commission of GH¢92,228.41 and a further amount of GH¢9,193.64 as profits from running the shop. He thus sued for the following reliefs in his amended writ of summons found at page 21 of the Record of Appeal (ROA):
(a) An order directed at the Defendant Company to pay to the Plaintiff the total commission of GH¢92,228.41 due to the Plaintiff between July 2016 and 31st October, 2016.
(b) An order directed at the Defendant Company to pay to the Plaintiff, the total profit of GH¢9,193.64 for the running of the Total Shop between the period July, 2016 and 31st October, 2016.
(c) Interest on the total sum due to the Plaintiff at the rate of 25% per annum from 31st October, 2016 till final date of payment.
(d) Cost which includes legal fees.
(e) Further Order(s) as this Honourable Court may see just.
The parties would be referred to as the Appellant and Respondent respectively in this judgment. The Appellant in its defence averred that the Respondent was a Supervisor at the station of which the deceased Stephen Hagan was dealer. After the dealer’s demise, the Respondent was allowed to continue on in his role as Supervisor. They denied that he was their dealer and thus denied any indebtedness to him.
The issues set down for determination by the trial court were:
1. Whether or not the Plaintiff worked for the Defendant Company as a Caretaker/Dealer?
2. Whether or not the Defendant Company admitted through correspondence that it is indebted to the Plaintiff in a sum?
3. Whether or not the Plaintiff is entitled to his claim?
4. Whether or not there was a formally signed dealership agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant?
5. Whether or not the Defendant Company held out the Plaintiff as the dealer of its Motorway 1 Service Station by allowing him to render accounts and sign documents in that regard?
6. Whether or not the Defendant Company opened a new dealership account for the Plaintiff?
7. Whether or