Patience Aku Mantey v. Menzgold Ghana Limited
June 7, 2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP MRS. ANGELINA MENSAH-HOMIAH J.
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
- Equity and Trusts
- Banking and Finance Law
June 7, 2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Her Ladyship Mrs. Angelina Mensah-Homiah J. determined a motion for summary judgment under Order 14 Rule 1 of C.I. 47 arising from an investment agreement where the Plaintiff paid GH¢100,000 and was promised 10% monthly interest. At the return date, defence counsel requested a supplementary affidavit on returns received from two investments, which the Plaintiff filed, confirming GH¢30,000 and GH¢12,000 received between March and July 2018. The court found the amended defence, which relied on the Bank of Ghana and SEC’s actions, disclosed no reasonable defence. Referring to prior High Court rulings that Menzgold’s gold trading scheme was a Ponzi and contrary to public policy, the court held the contract unenforceable. Nonetheless, applying unjust enrichment, it ordered restitution of GH¢100,000 with simple interest at the prevailing bank rate from each investment date, less amounts already paid, and awarded costs of GH¢5,000.
Before me is a Motion on Notice for “Summary Judgement” pursuant to Order 14 Rule 1 of C. I. 47. On the return date of the Motion, 27th May 2019, Counsel for the Defendant was in Court and prayed that an Order be made for the Plaintiff to file a Supplementary Affidavit and indicate the returns she has received on the two (2) investments.
The Plaintiff accordingly filed a Supplementary Affidavit on 31st May, 2019. The reliefs sought by the Plaintiff as endorsed on her Writ of Summons filed on 9th October, 2018 are: a. Declaration that the Defendant has breached the terms of the Agreement between the Parties when it defaulted in paying 10% monthly interest to the Plaintiff.
b. Damages for breach of contract.
c. Recovery of the sum of GH¢100, 000. 00 being monetary worth of investments received by the Defendant.
d. An Order for the Defendant to pay agreed 10% monthly interest on the said investments from August, 2018 till date of final payment.
In the Amended Statement of Defence filed on 27th November 2018, paragraph 8, the Defendant averred that it is in breach of its contractual relationship due to the conduct of the Bank of Ghana (BoG) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC. )In her Reply filed on 19th November 2018, the Plaintiff averred that the failure to comply with the Laws of Ghana cannot amount to frustration of contract, in law.
Indeed, the Statement of Defence filed by the Defendant as Amended, does not disclose any reasonable Defence to the claims made by the Plaintiff.
This is a proper case where Summary Judgment can be granted under Order 14 Rule of C. I. 47. However, this Court cannot turn a blind eye to the earlier decisions in cases such as: (1) Kwame Agyemang Oduro Vrs Menzgold Ghana Limited Suit No. GJ/1458/18, 25th March 2019, in which the Court found that the Gold Trading Investment Scheme run by Menzgold Ghana Limited is a “Ponzi” Scheme, the Court in all those line of cases, held that the contracts could not be enforced as same are contrary to public policy.
The facts upon which this suit has been brought are the same as in the Menzgold Ghana Limited cases referred to supra.
I will follow my earlier decisions, as referred to above and hold that the contract in issue cannot be enforced.
However, on the principle of unjust enrichment, the Plaintiff is entitled to a refund of her investments with interest at the prevailing Bank Rate less all the returns she has received.
Accordingly, Summary Judgment is entered agains