GH - OTC International GmbH v. Scimplant Limited and 4 Ors

It is stated under Order 33 Rules 3 and 5 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (C. I. 47) as follows: “3. The Court may order any question or issue arising in any cause or matter whether of fact or law, or partly of fact and partly of law, and raised by the pleadings to be tried before, at or after the trial of the cause or matter and may give directions as to the manner in which the question or issue shall be stated”. 5. Where it appears to the Court that the decision of any question or issue arising in any cause or matter and tried separately from the main cause or matter substantially disposes of the cause or matter or renders trial of the main cause or matter unnecessary, it may dismiss the cause or matter or make such other order or give such judgment as may be just”. At the directions stage, and having apprised myself of the issues set down as emanating from the pleadings of the parties, the first of which was whether or not Plaintiff is an existing company.

I was so guided by the above provisions in the Rules of Court, for which I invited the parties on both sides for preliminary determination of the existence of Plaintiff as a company, as this issue if settled, that there is no existing company by name OTC International GMBH, it will be superfluous for the court to exert its scarce time and energy to determine the other issues regarding the recovery of monies.

Accordingly, for the determination of this issue, I invited the lawyers to file written submissions accompanied by affidavit together with all the necessary documentations as exhibits, for the court to rule on this issue.

Being a simple case instituted by the Plaintiff for the recovery of 168, 351. 72 Euros as due and owing to the Plaintiff since 31st December, 2014 for supplier’s credit in respect of goods Plaintiff claim to have granted Defendant together with interest from 31st December, 2014, Defendants in a statement of defence filed as late as the 6th of May, 2019, after leave have been granted them stated under paragraph 3 that: “In further denial of paragraph 1, the Defendants aver that they have every reason to believe that Plaintiff no longer exists in view of matters to be herein after pleaded and therefore denies paragraph 2 of the statement of claim and put Plaintiff to strict proof”. Defendants then proceeded to claim that it attempted to pay off part of the money being claimed by Plaintiff and transferred various sums of money to Plaintiff in February, 2018, when

OTC International GmbH v. Scimplant Limited and 4 Ors

Areas of Law

RULING