GHANA UNION ASSURANCE CO. LTD VS AFRICA HEAVY MACHINES LTD
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE GEORGE BUADI J.
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure
- Insurance Law
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Plaintiff, an insurance company, sought recovery of unpaid premiums from the defendant. Despite following procedural rules for judgment in default of appearance, the court scrutinized the legitimacy of the claim in light of NIC's "No Premium, No Cover" directive. The directive, effective April 2014, mandated insurers to write off unpaid premiums after December 2014. The court held that applications for judgment in default should be assessed on merit and upheld the legitimacy of the NIC directive, ultimately dismissing the plaintiff's claim.
1. 0 Background By the practice and procedure of the court, applications for final judgment in default of appearance under Order 10 Rules 1 and 7 of C. I. 47 is a simple application whose results are largely certain.
However, the nature of plaintiff’s claim in the face of policy directive from the National Insurance Commission (NIC) in my view demands much closer look of the application, first as to the legitimacy of plaintiff’s claim, and secondly analysis of most often questioned authority of the court to suo motu raise points of law.
1. 1 The fundamental issue inherent in this application for determination in my view is whether or not plaintiff's action is competent in law in the face of NIC’s policy directive.
Heward-Mills v Heward-Mills [1992] 1 GLR 153 CA.
The application thus goes beyond the normal consideration of the largely undefended applications for judgment in default of appearance or defence.
It provokes analysis as I stated just above on the authority of the court in raising points of law as against what seems to be gaining currency in trial courts that grant of such applications are automatic and that the trial judge has no mandate raising points of law that ordinarily has be raised by the defaulting party if they were minded to defend the action.
2. 0 Plaintiff’s statement of case Plaintiff, the applicant herein is an insurance company.
Its cause of action against defendant as evident on the statement of claim is simple: that defendant is indebted to it as at 11 February 2013 as a result of insurance cover it provided defendant.
Having failed in all attempts to recover the premium arrears, plaintiff on 25 August 2015 issued writ of summons against defendant for the following reliefs: a. Recovery of the sum of Twenty-Eight Thousand, Four Hundred and Fifty-Four United States Dollars and Forty-Nine Cents (US$28, 454. 49) or its Ghana Cedis equivalent b. Interest on the said sum of Twenty-Eight Thousand, Four Hundred and Fifty-Four United States Dollars and Forty-Nine Cents (US$28, 454. 49) from February 2013 until the date of final payment calculated at the Commercial Bank lending rate c. Costs inclusive of lawyers’ fees d. Any further order or order(s) as this Honourable Court may deem fit.
2. 1 Undoubtedly, defendant has been served with plaintiff’s writ of summons and statement of claim by substituted service published in the Ghanaian Times with leave of this court.
Having failed to enter appearance, plaintiff expectedly ha