VICTORIA AIDOO v. JOYCE QUANING

JUDGMENT

FACTS

The plaintiff caused a writ of summons to issue on 16th May, 2019 claiming against

the defendant the following reliefs;

a. Recovery of an amount of Forty-Four Thousand Ghana Cedis (GH₵44,000) as

being cost of container and thereon.

b. Interest of the sum till date of final payment.

c. Damages for breach of contract.

d. Damages for fraud.

e. Costs.2

THE CASE OF THE PLAINTIFF

The case of the plaintiff is that she is a trader who sells plumbing materials for

building. In February, 2018, the defendant offered to sell a container to her to use as

a shop for her business. The plaintiff avers that the defendant informed her that she

is a lessee of the land on which the container was situated and the term of the lease

was for a period of five (5) years with an unexpired period of four years remaining.

The defendant also assured her that she had secured the consent of the landlord to

sublet the land to her. Based on these representations, she accepted the offer to

purchase the container. Further to this, she paid an amount of Forty-Four Thousand

Ghana Cedis (GH₵44,000) for the value of the container, three showcases, a big sign

board, three ceiling fans and lights fixed in the container. The plaintiff further alleges

that inclusive in the purchase price was the consideration for the sublease of the

defendant’s four years unexpired lease of the land.

Again, the parties agreed that the defendant will furnish the plaintiff with a receipt

covering the transaction which spells out the terms of the agreement. The plaintiff

says further that when the defendant provided the receipt for the payments she had

made, she realized to her chagrin that the defendant had represented on the receipt

that she was renting the land to the plaintiff for a period of three years and not four

years as agreed upon by the parties. The plaintiff says she rejected the receipt by

refusing to append her signature to it.

Additionally, the plaintiff avers that after making payment, she moved into

occupation of the container and discovered to her disappointment that the defendant

had removed two of the showcases and the sign board contrary to their agreement

but she did not raise issues. Subsequently, the landlord of the defendant confronted

her on her occupation on the land and informed her that the defendant did not seek3

his consent before subletting the land to her and that the unexpired term of the lease

with the defendant was three years and n