MAHOB HOLDING COMPANY LIMITED v. SILVERSTAR AUTO LIMITED & DAIMLER CHRYSLER AG
2018
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- KWEKU T. ACKAAH-BOAFO JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
2018
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Following the Court's ruling on July 9, 2018, which allowed the Plaintiff to tender additional documentary evidence, the 1st Defendant sought leave to file supplementary witness statements and introduce documents to counter the Plaintiff's claims. The Plaintiff opposed this application, particularly questioning the relevance and competency of the proposed documents and individuals presenting them. The Court found that the 1st Defendant's proposed documents (Exhibits 24, 25, and 26) were not sufficiently linked to the case and deemed them irrelevant. However, the Court allowed the 1st Defendant to replace illegible copies of previously submitted job cards.
RULING
Defendant’s Motion to File Supplementary Witness Statement
i. The Applicant’s Case:
[1] This Court’s ruling of July 9, 2018 is what has undoubtedly triggered the instant application by the 1st Defendant. This is an application by Counsel for and on behalf of the 1st Defendant herein praying for leave to file supplementary witness statement.
[2] The main thrust of the application is that during the cross-examination of the Plaintiff/Respondent’s witness in May 2018, the Respondent sought leave to file a Supplementary Witness Statement to introduce documentary evidence related to the “proof of the alleged purchase of a Hyundai Elantra and documents purporting to be evidence of vehicle rental”. According to the Applicant herein though it opposed the application on the grounds that it was seeking to fill in the gaps in the evidence, the Court granted the application. It is deposed that “the alleged documents contrary to the Respondent’s assertion was not in Respondent’s possession the reason for the failure to put them in evidence earlier”.
[3] It is deposed that “given the late entry of these documents/evidence, Applicant could not reasonably bring any documentary evidence to challenge these pieces of evidence at the time as it was almost at the close of its cross-examination session”. In the light of that Applicant says it has “since been able to procure documentary evidence to challenge the documentary evidence introduced by Respondent”. The Applicant is therefore by this instant application praying the Court that “in the interest of justice and to assist this Honourable Court make a determination on the documentary evidence tendered by the Respondent”, the Applicant should also be permitted to attach certain documents marked as Exhibits KAB and for same to be relied upon at trial. The Applicant also prays to tender in evidence samples of a speed sensor with its cable as well as a Turbo Charger. The Applicant further seeks leave to replace “photocopies of pages of already tendered Job cards which were not legible”.
[4] Arguing in support of the motion, learned Counsel for the 1st Defendant/Applicant referred to the depositions in the affidavit in support and submitted that the Applicant’s prayer is in threefold. First, the Applicant seeks leave to adduce further evidence by way of documents marked as Exhibit 24 and 25 Series attached to the proposed Supplementary Witness Statement. Second, the Applicant seeks leave to tender certain par