2021
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
A contractor advanced dollar and cedi-denominated financial assistance to a forex bureau operator under three agreements, with an interest obligation. After default, dishonoured cheques, and a police report that produced disputed understandings about waiving interest, the High Court in Koforidua entered judgment for the lender, ordering recovery of GHC640,000 plus interest, general damages, and costs. The Court of Appeal partly allowed the borrower’s appeal, awarding recovery of GHC640,000 with post-judgment simple interest at the prevailing bank rate and affirming GHC20,000 in general damages. On further appeal, the Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal’s sua sponte moneylender finding was unwarranted because it was unpleaded, but agreed the transaction was not a “foreign exchange business” under section 3(4) of Act 723; dollar denomination was incidental. The Court rejected the claim that principal was fully paid, declined to revisit interest absent a cross-appeal under Rule 9 of C.I. 16, and affirmed dismissal of the appeal.
LOVELACE-JOHNSON (MS.) JSC:-
The background to this case is that the plaintiff gave some money to the defendant per
three agreements to be repaid with interest charged thereon. The defendant defaulted
on the repayment terms. Cheques given by the defendant to defray amounts due were
dishonoured so the plaintiff made a report to the police where some agreement was
reached. According to the defendant, it was agreed that he would only pay the principal
amounts and be discharged from all liability. According to the plaintiff, what the
defendant paid upon being reported to the police was some of the interest. Failure to
recover the amounts allegedly due him led to his lawyers sending a demand letter to
the Defendant and him filing a writ on 20th June 2016.
On the 21st day of June 2019, the high court sitting at Koforidua in the Eastern region
gave the plaintiff judgment on his claims for
(a) A declaration that as at 30th April 2016 the defendant owed the plaintiff the
following sums of money being financial assistance the plaintiff gave to the
defendant on 28th May 2008, 15th June 2008 and 11th August 2008 respectively:
(i) GHC60,000.00
(ii) USD120,000.00 (ie cedi equivalent of GHC480,000.00as today)
(iii) GHC100,000.00
(b) An order for the recovery of these monies (totaling GHC640,000.00) and all
accrued interest thereon to the date of final payment.
(c) General damages for breach of contract
(d) Costs, including legal costs
Being dissatisfied with this judgment the defendant appealed to the court of appeal on
the following grounds
1. The judgment is against the weight of evidence
2. The learned judge erred in his appreciation of the laws on borrowing and lending
in Ghana
3. Other grounds of appeal may by leave be filed upon receipt of the Record of
Appeal
The Court of Appeal struck out the second ground of appeal for stated reason (see
page 253 of the record of appeal (ROA) and determined the appeal on the omnibus
ground that the judgment is against the weight of evidence. At the end of the hearing,
the court delivered itself thus in the summary of its judgment
“In summary, plaintiff is adjudged to recover from the defendant the total sum of
GHc640,000.00
Post judgment interest calculated at the prevailing bank rate and at simple interest shall
be paid on this sum from the date of the judgment of the trial court, that is, 21
st
June
The award of General damages of GHc20,000.00 for breach of contract is affirmed.
The a