MADAM AFUA AKYIAA v. CHARLES YAW OPOKU MENSAH & ANOTHER

RULING

In this application, the defendants/applicants, hereinafter called “the Applicants” are praying this court for an order setting aside the Entry of Judgment filed against them on 24th of December, 2018 by the plaintiff/respondent, hereinafter called “the Respondent”.

On 31st August, 2018 the respondent issued a writ of summons against the applicants claiming the following reliefs:

a. An order for the recovery of the sum of Eighty-Nine Thousand Ghana Cedis(GHC89,000.00) from the Defendants which said sum represents this unpaid portion of the total value of goods sold and supplied to Defendants by the Plaintiff as of January, 2018.

b. Interest on the said sum from January, 2018 till date of final payment.

c. General and special damages including legal fees and cost.

d. Any other relief(s) deemed appropriate by the Honorable Court.

At the pre-trial settlement conference, the applicants admitted respondent’s claim in respect of GHC 53,706.70 of the amount entered on the writ and it was agreed that the honourable court enters judgment in favour of the respondent to the sum admitted. It was also agreed that the outstanding sum of GHC 35,293.70 was to be set down for trial.

The gravamen of the application is that the Entry of Judgment does not reflect the terms of settlement upon which partial judgment was entered against the applicants in the sum of Fifty-Three Thousand Seven Hundred and Six Ghana Cedis Seventy Pesewas (GHC 53,706.70) on 28th November, 2018. Counsel for the applicants argues that per Exhibit A (Terms of Settlement) no interest was mentioned. It is, therefore, wrong for interest to be calculated on the agreed amount in the Entry of Judgment. Counsel cites the case of Owusu v Kumah and Anor (1984/86) 2GLR 29 in support of the view that parties are bound by their terms of settlement and as such same must reflect in the Entry of Judgment. She invites the court to set aside the Entry of Judgment.

The respondent is opposed to the application. Central to the respondent’s opposition is the fact that he is entitled to interest on the agreed sum as per reliefs “b”, “c” and “d” of the writ interest had been prayed for. Counsel for the respondent argues that it is the practice at the Commercial Court that once you admit to a claim you are to pay interest from the date of default hence the respondent is entitled to interest on the agreed sum, as captured in the Entry of Judgment. He also argues that if the court is of the opinion that the appl