Paul Josten v. West African Aviation Solution Ltd and Jonathan Porter
May 21, 2018
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- JUSTICE GEORGE BUADI J.
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Corporate Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
- Commercial Law
May 21, 2018
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Justice George Buadi of the Ghana High Court (Commercial Division 5) decided a dispute between a pensioner in Accra and a flight-training company and its director. Under a 2009 agreement, the plaintiff terminated in 2013 with the required notice and sought a refund of USD 24,031.81, his outstanding credit. The company initially contested and counterclaimed but later withdrew the counterclaim and submitted to judgment for the amount. Defendants attempted to present testimony through Mathew Porter using powers of attorney that the court found invalid under Ghana’s execution and authentication rules, leaving the defense without evidence. Assessing the plaintiff’s uncontroverted evidence, the court awarded the refund with interest and costs against the company, and dismissed the claim against the director for lack of proof of personal liability, emphasizing corporate separateness and evidentiary burdens.
1 Background By an amended writ of summons and statement of claim dated 24 June 20151, plaintiff’s claim against defendants jointly and severally simply is for: a. A refund of the balance of Twenty Four Thousand and Thirty-One United States of America Dollars, Eighty One Cents (USD 24, 031. 81) or its Ghana Cedi equivalent.
b. Interest on the balance of (USD 24, 031. 81) or its Ghana Cedi equivalent at the current commercial bank rate from August 1, 2014 till date of final payment.
Plaintiff is presently a pensioner in Accra, whilst 1st defendant is a company that carries on business of building, maintaining and training in 2-seat light aircraft.
2nd defendant is the shareholder/director, indeed the director manager, who according to plaintiff not only established the company but has unfettered control over the company since its incorporation.
2 Plaintiff’s case On November 19, 2009, pursuant to agreement, plaintiff enrolled in the company’s flight-training program, but in September 2013, pursuant to express term in the agreement that required 4-month prior notice, plaintiff by a letter to the company expressed intent to discontinue his flight-training schedule and thus to terminate the agreement.
According to plaintiff, at the time he terminated the agreement, he had an amount of $24, 031. 81 outstanding on his account with defendants, which he requested for refund.
Plaintiff’s claim is that the company admitted owing him of the sum, and that 2nd defendant treated the debt as his personal liability, promising on behalf of the company that defendants would pay the outstanding credit balance, but that defendants have failed or renege on their promise despite repeated demands.
3 Defendants’ case Defendants admit what I can describe as the primary facts of plaintiff’s case.
1st defendant admits liability, but contends that plaintiff wrote off their indebtedness.
It made a counterclaim against plaintiff, claiming, first, that plaintiff failed to make payments for emergency medical services that defendants provided to plaintiff upon a rescue call when plaintiff was involved in a near fatal motorcycle accident at Dodowa.
1st defendant claim is that they are entitled to payment for the medical expenses based on “the restitutionary principle of necessitous intervention …. to prevent unjust enrichment of plaintiff”. Secondly, defendants claim is for payment of parking fees at the company’s airfield of plaintiff’s motorbike for two years, which plaintiff f