GH - GHANA OIL COMPANY VS BAMICH INVESTMENTS & ANOR

The plaintiff, a registered corporate entity dealing in petroleum products, sued Bamich Investment Ghana Limited (1st defendant) per the plaintiff’s lawful attorney, Johnson Complex (Gh) Ltd. Bamich Investment Ghana Limited is also a corporate entity and the customer of the plaintiff company.

The plaintiff has sued Bamich Investment Ghana Limited for the recovery of the amount of GH¢ 315, 335. 68 and interest on the amount calculated at the prevailing bank lending rate from 29-10-2013 till the date of final payment.

In this suit, the plaintiff initially sued Bamich Investment Co.

Ltd and later amended the Writ of summons to join the State Insurance Co.

Ltd. Accordingly, Bamich Investment Ltd is now the 1st defendant and the State Insurance Co.

Ltd is the 2nd defendant.

According to the plaintiff, they entered into a supply credit agreement with the Bamich Investment Ghana Limited, according to which the plaintiff would supply them with petroleum products on credit over a time period of 12 months.

To secure the supply credit agreement, the plaintiff obtained a bond guarantee dated 11-3-2013 from the State Insurance Company Ltd (2nd defendant) for the due repayment of the value of the supply credit agreement.

By a notice filed by the 2nd defendant on 27-2-2015, the 2nd defendant also claims against the 1st defendant an indemnity of GH¢ 315, 335. 00 plus interest and costs.

On 27-2-2015, the 2nd defendant filed a statement of defence in which they contend that “the premature call in of the Bond discharged it from liability under the Bond. ” In the alternative, the 2nd defendant contends that they are entitled to be indemnified by the 1st defendant in the event where judgment is entered against them by the court by reason of the bond.

On 20-8-2015, pursuant to Order 14 of C. I. 47, the plaintiff filed an application for summary judgement against the 2nd defendant for the reliefs endorsed on the amended writ of summons.

To the affidavit in support, the plaintiff exhibited the power of attorney in proof of the capacity of their lawful attorney, a statement of account clearly showing the indebtedness of the 1st defendant as standing at GH¢ 315, 335. 68, a copy of the guarantee bond no. P/120/04/4120/2013/9 and the correspondence relative to the call in of the bond.

In their opposition to the application, the 2nd defendant reiterated their contention that the call in of the bond was premature, because the liability of the 1st defendant to settle the de