GOVERNMENT OF GHANA v. GHANA CONSOLIDATED MACHINERY AND TRADING CO., LTD.

JUDGMENT OF AKAINYAH J.

This is an interpleader action in which the claimant the Government of Ghana claims for declaration of title to certain chattels seized in execution under a writ of fi. fa. at the instance of the judgment-creditors herein—Ghana Consolidated Machinery and Trading Co., Ltd. [His lordship here set out the respective statement of claim of the claimant and the statement of defence of the judgment-creditors and continued:]

On the 31st January, 1963, Mr. Lokko for the judgment-creditors argued a preliminary point taken by him and submitted that:

"(a) On the 4th June, 1962, the judgment-creditors obtained a judgment (exhibit 2) against the judgment-debtors of the sum of £G18, 145 and costs of 700 guineas.

(b) The judgment-creditors base their claim to the chattels on a bill of sale dated the 12th February, 1962, (exhibit 3).

(c) When the bill of sale (exhibit 3) was executed the judgment-debtors did not disclose to the judgment-creditors that the said chattels had been assigned to Government—the claimant herein. Had the fact been disclosed, the judgment-creditors would not have given the judgment-debtors any credit at all, and exhibit 3 would not have been executed.

(d) The claimant says that it is the owner of the said chattels (traxcavator and crushing plant) by virtue of a deed of assignment dated the 14th March, 1961, (exhibit A) but the judgment-creditors do not admit that the claimant is the owner of the said chattels.

[p.108]

(e) The claimant is a quasi-mortgagee therefore it only has equitable interest in those goods; because it has not averred that it gave notice to the judgment-debtors in respect of any arrears under the mortgage nor was it alleged that a breach of some provision in the deed of assignment which ought to have been observed or performed by the mortgagor-the judgment-debtors-other than a covenant for payment of the mortgage money and interest. The provisions or requirements are not statutory. They are common law requirements.

(f) The claimant's deed of assignment (exhibit A) is defective as a legal assignment because, it does not contain provision for notice and demand. It can operate only in equity therefore claimant can enforce it only by coming to court.

(g) The equities in this suit are equal therefore the judgment-creditors who are in possession are entitled to sell the chattels. They should be treated as bona fide purchasers for value without notice and be given priority over the claimant."

Couns