NOVA COMPLEX LIMITED v. GHANA PORT & HARBOURS AUTHORITY
January 27, 2010
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- DATE-BAH, JSC (PRESIDING)
- ADINYIRA (MRS), JSC
- DOTSE, JSC
- ANIN YEBOAH, JSC
- BAFFOE-BONNIE, JSC
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Banking and Finance Law
January 27, 2010
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Supreme Court, per Dr. S.K. Date-Bah JSC, delivered a unanimous judgment resolving a dispute over post-judgment interest arising after earlier Supreme Court orders had awarded interest on a $600,000 replacement value, a cedi sum, and $900,000 for loss of use. The respondent, having obtained a garnishee order nisi later discharged by the High Court with specific interest directives, appealed to the Court of Appeal, which ordered that post-judgment interest on the dollar component be calculated at the prevailing US rate until final payment. The appellant then appealed, contending that applying CI 52 was retroactive and that the applicable rate should be the rate at the date of payment, alternatively 4% under LN 140A. The Supreme Court held CI 52 applies prospectively, clarified that post-judgment interest accrues from the Supreme Court’s judgment date, and that the statutory rate under Rule 4 is the bank rate prevailing on that date. The appeal was dismissed subject to variations correcting the start date and applicable rate.
J U D G M E N T
DR. DATE-BAH, J.S.C:
This is the unanimous judgment of the Court.
FACTS
This case relates to a dispute about the amount of interest due from a judgment-debtor to a judgment creditor.
The respondent in this case filed a motion ex parte on 16th July 2007 for a garnishee order nisi directed at banks where the appellant has accounts. In her affidavit in support of this motion, the Managing-Director of the respondent deposed to the fact that the respondent had obtained judgment in the Supreme Court against the appellant on 15th November 2006 and that the appellant had on 3rd January 2007 paid into court 905,735,855.00 cedis and a further $1,535,437.50 by March 2007.These payments had been made in satisfaction of a Supreme Court order in this case which was in the following terms:
“The decision of this court is unanimous. The appeal fails in part and succeeds in part only ie on the ground dealing with the award of the sum of $2,658,300 as an indemnity for the respondent’s tort, as well as interest etc.
The cross appeal succeeds in part only, that is on question of costs only and fails on all the other grounds. In this regard, the cost awarded in the Court of Appeal is assessed as c50 million cedis.
Costs would be assessed at c50m.
This Court awards interest only on the replacement value of the vessel assessed at $600,000 at the US dollar rate as stipulated by the Bank of Ghana and as per the Court of Appeal decision; from the date of beaching – 9th March 2001- to the date of judgment, 29th July 2004 or its cedi equivalent and at the 440,649,992.25 cedis together with interest at the prevailing bank rate from the date of beaching – 9th March 2001 – to the date of judgment, 29th July 2004.
Loss of Use
This Court assesses the loss of use as $900,000 (NINE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ONLY).”
On receiving copies of the letters accompanying the appellant’s payments into court, the respondent wrote to the appellant drawing its attention to the fact that post judgment interest was also payable on the amounts and, in the case of the US dollar amounts, not at the Bank of Ghana dollar base rate, but at a US dollar prime rate. The deponent referred to above stated that the appellant did not reply to this letter. The deponent further averred that as at 29th January 2007 what remained unpaid of the judgment debt was US £204,095.00 and 690,959,127.00 cedis (being mainly post-judgment interest and the use of the wrong rate of interest in the calculation