GH - HERO DEI-ALORSE VS DR. ABRAHAM GAITU

At the trial, Plaintiff’s Counsel raised objections to Defendant’s Exhibits 2 and 3 on the grounds that Exhibit 2 is a Whatsapp conversation and per the decision on A2Z Infraservices Ltd. vs. Quippo Infrastructure Ltd. , Whatsapp conversations must be admitted into evidence with care since anything at all can be posted and removed on social media.

In respect of Defendant’s Exhibit 3, Plaintiff’s Counsel objects to same on the grounds that the documents are cumulative and per section 52 (a) & (b), such documents are inadmissible into evidence.

In response, Defence Counsel says Exhibit 2 is a Whatsapp Message between the parties and its contents are based on the Defendant’s assertion that Defendant paid some monies to the Plaintiff, a claim that is founded on Defendant’s Statement of Claim.

In respect of Exhibit 3, Defence Counsel submitted that the documents are not cumulative or repetitive and that its contents are also rooted in Defendant’s pleadings.

BY COURT: Upon hearing both Counsel in the suit, this Court can find that the documents Defendant seeks to tender in evidence are deeply rooted in the pleadings of the Defendant.

In fact, Defendant’s Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3 have their basis in Defendant’s Statement of Defence.

Again, this Court finds the said Exhibits very material to the case of the Defendant and there is no doubt about their relevance in helping the Court to determine the issues at hand.

In view of these findings, the Court will overrule the objections and admit Defendant’s Exhibit 2 and 3 into evidence.

They are labelled Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3 for the Defendant.

(Sgd.)

John Ekow Mensah, J.

High Court One (1), Ho.