JOSEPH APPPIAGYEI v. JAMES APPIAGYEI & ANOTHER
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- ANGELINA M. DOMAKYAAREH (MRS.) JA. (PRESIDING)
- A. B. POKU-ACHEAMPONG, JA.
- SAMUEL K.A. ASIEDU, JA.
Areas of Law
- Tort Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
On appeal from the High Court in Mampong, Ashanti, the Court of Appeal, per Samuel K. A. Asiedu JA, addressed a family dispute over goods imported from Germany by the Appellant, which the 1st Respondent, his brother, had cleared at the port of Tema and later sold. At first instance, conversion was found only for items listed in exhibit 1 and judgment entered against the 1st Respondent; the claim against the 2nd Respondent was dismissed. On appeal, the Appellant alleged the trial court failed to consider conversion and that the judgment was against the weight of the evidence, including its executability because no specific value was stated. The Court of Appeal rejected these complaints, affirmed the findings limiting the quantum to exhibits 1 and 2, and, to avoid failure of justice, substituted a specific award of GH,000 plus interest at the bank rate from 27 February 1991. The court upheld the exclusion of irrelevant cross-examination about marital status and declined costs mindful of the brothers relationship.
ASIEDU, JA.
This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court, Mampong, Ashanti delivered on the 24th July 2019. On the 14th day of April 2014, the Plaintiff/Appellant in this matter issued a writ against the Defendants/Respondents claiming jointly and severally against them:
1. Recovery of cash the sum of Forty-Six Thousand Euros (€46,000.00) which is equivalent of One Hundred and Sixty Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty-Eight Ghana Cedis (GHȼ160,928.00) being the value or cost of 11 bales of men and women’s wears, 7 bags of men and women’s shoes, Two (2) big Deep Freezers, One (1) Table-Top Refrigerator, One (1) Car Washing Machine, Two (2) video Decks, Three Television Sets, Fifty-Four (54) Large size Liquid Soaps (3 boxes packed), Fifteen full pieces of Wax prints, Three boxes set of House Utensils, Six (6) boxes of spoons and knives, Car Batteries, Charging Machines and Chenada Sound System with Six Universal pieces and Two (2) Large Speakers which the Defendants somewhere in March 1989 without the consent and knowledge of the Plaintiff, collected all the above named items/properties which were packed in a family house at Nobesu, sold and made use of the money and the Plaintiff upon several repeated demands from the Defendants have woefully refused/failed to pay same.
2. Interest on the said amount at the current bank rate till the final payment.
3. Costs.
The Defendants/Respondents filed their statement of defence and after the learned trial judge had gone through case management with the parties, the matter was heard after which the Judge entered judgment for the Plaintiff/Appellant to recover from the 1st Defendant/Respondent, the value of the goods which the 1st Defendant had admitted selling and then dismissed the claim against the 2nd Defendant herein. Aggrieved by the judgment, the Plaintiff filed the instant appeal on the 27th day of September 2019 and prayed the Court that “the judgment of the High Court be set aside and enter (sic) judgment that specifies the amount Appellant is entitled” on the grounds that:
a. The court erred when it failed to consider the issue of conversion in the instant case though already determined (sic).
b. The judgment is against the weight of the evidence adduced.
We have decided to discuss the appeal in the order in which the grounds of appeal have been filed. The first ground of appeal is that “the court erred when it failed to consider the issue of conversion in the instant case though already d