FELIBAT COLD STORE LTD v. STANBIC BANK GHANA LTD
May 29, 2020
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- 1. ANGELINA DOMAKYAAREH (MRS.) JA. (PRESIDING)
- 2. A. B. POKU-ACHEAMPONG, JA.
- 3. SAMUEL K.A. ASIEDU, JA
May 29, 2020
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
Try asking the following...
S. K. A. ASIEDU, JA.
On the 30th November 2010, the Plaintiff/Respondent/Appellant, hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff, who was then indebted to the Defendant/Appellant/Respondent (hereinafter referred to as the Defendant), wrote exhibit C herein to the Defendant. In the said exhibit, the Plaintiff acknowledged its total indebtedness to the Defendant in the sum of GH₵481,922.78. The Plaintiff then proposed to the Defendant in exhibit C that first, “all the 3 facilities be consolidated and treated as a term loan for 12 months duration; second, that the total outstanding balance as at 21st May of GH₵481,922.78 (interest inclusive) be maintained as GH₵450,000.00 (waiving off GH₵31,922.78); thirdly, that the re-scheduled term loan of GH₵450,000.00 shall attract no interest thereon; fourthly, that the re-scheduled loan will be paid in 12 equal instalments for a period of 12 months; and finally, that post-dated cheques of GH₵37,500.00 each totaling GH₵450,000.00 are attached to assure you of payment.”
In response to the Plaintiff’s letter the Defendant wrote exhibit D in which the Defendant stated, among others, that:
“We refer to your letter of November 30th 2010, requesting for a rescheduling of repayment of your outstanding debt at a discounted amount of GH₵450,000.00 (Four Hundred and Fifty Thousand Ghana Cedis only) in the books of the bank.
The bank in principle is agreeable to reviewing its current interest charges on the account and also consider the restructuring proposal subject to the payment of GH₵120,000.00 by three equal instalments of GH₵40, 000.00 by postdated cheques to be lodged with the bank to mature on the last working day of the months of January, February and March.
Please note that this letter is not intended to create a separate repayment arrangement. The terms of the facility letter dated October 12, 2009 still apply.
We look forward to hearing from you.”
According to the Plaintiff, upon receipt of exhibit D and after a few meetings with the Relationship Manager of the Defendant bank, it started paying, by cheque the sum of GH₵40,000.00 per month to the Defendant bank from January through to September 2011 and then finally GH₵30,000.00 per month from October through to December 2011.
In January 2012, the Plaintiff wrote exhibit F to the Defendant in which the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to release to the Plaintiff, the title deeds to the property which the Plaintiff had used as security for the loan which the Plainti
AI Generated Summary
This Ghana Court of Appeal decision, authored by Justice Samuel K. A. Asiedu with Justices Angelina Domakyaareh (Presiding) and A. B. Poku‑Acheampong concurring, arose from a dispute between a borrower and its bank over the restructuring of indebtedness and the bank’s retention of title deeds. The borrower’s exhibit C proposed capping total indebtedness at GH₵450,000 with interest frozen and repayment over 12 months; the bank’s exhibit D indicated agreement in principle subject to paying GH₵120,000 via three GH₵40,000 cheques. The borrower then paid GH₵40,000 monthly January–September 2011 and GH₵30,000 October–December 2011. After the borrower sought return of title deeds in January 2012, the bank claimed a residual GH₵72,463 and refused. The High Court found a binding agreement and ordered release of deeds. On appeal, the Court struck out vague and unauthorized grounds, held exhibit D was a counter‑offer accepted by performance forming a binding contract, dismissed the bank’s appeal, affirmed general damages for detinue, treated penalty interest as an unenforceable penalty and ordered a refund of GH₵93,366.60 with interest, and dismissed the borrower’s cross‑appeal for special damages and increased costs.