KWAKU YENTUM BOAITEY -VRS PRESTIGE CAPITAL LIMITED

BACKGROUND FACTS:

On the 7th of July 2020, the plaintiff/respondent (hereinafter referred to as “the Respondent”) sued the defendant/appellant for payment of the cash sum said to be due and owing him as at the 18th of December 2019 of GHC475,809.80 (Four Hundred and Seventy-Five Thousand, Eight Hundred and Nine Ghana Cedis and Eighty Pesewas). According to the Respondent, it was agreed between them as contracting parties that monies which he had paid to the Appellant on a series of earlier dates and times amounting to GHC419,978.35 (Four Hundred and Nineteen Thousand Nine Hundred and Seventy-Eight Ghana Cedis and ThirtyFive Pesewas) would mature on the due date of 18th of December 2019 to the total sum due and owing to him of GHC475,809.80.

After initially filing a Conditional Appearance on the 9th of July 2020, the Appellant filed its Defence to the action on the 1st of September 2020. The crux of its defence to the action was that the nature of the agreement that it entered into with the Respondent placed it under the statutory authority and remit of the Securities & Exchange Commission under relevant provisions of the Securities Industry Act, 2016 (Act 929), and therefore that the institution of the action in the High Court was premature and flawed, suffering from a want of jurisdiction.

The Appellant pleaded these two assertions in paragraphs 3 and 14 of its Defence as follows:

“3 And, The Defendant repeats the preceding paragraph and adds that its activities are governed by the Securities Industry Act, 2016 (Act 929) as well as regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission.”

“14 The Defendant repeats the preceding paragraph and adds that the said void and incompetent writ of summons together with the statement of claim are premature and incapable of invoking the Honourable Court’s jurisdiction due to non-compliance with mandatory statutory preconditions.”

No Reply appears to have been filed by the Respondent, and shortly upon the close of pleadings Summons for Directions were filed on the 28th of November 2020, praying that 3 main issues be set down for determination at trial, being as follows:

“(a) Whether or not the Plaintiff applied to appoint the Defendant as a Manager of his Investments subject to the acceptance of the Defendants?

(b) Whether or not the Plaintiff agreed to the Defendant serving as an Investment Advisor and empowered, by a Power of Attorney