JAMES ADDO vs. CEO of FIC

RULING The applicant herein argued in his motion filed on 18/10/13 that his accounts frozen by the respondent be defrozen as such are not tainted. The applicant James Addo says he is a pensioner and a lotto receiver when the applicant filed the K. Y. C form at First Capital Plus he indicated he is a lotto receiver and his monthly income is GH¢600 and rents the apartment he is living in. Checks were conducted by the respondent from National Lottery Authority and on the 22/10/13 the lotteries replied that, applicant is unknown to them in their records. The affidavit in opposition, paragraph 22, the respondent deposed that, when First Capital Plus questioned the applicant about the inflows were inconsistent with what he stated, applicant said they were winnings from his customers but failed to provide any documentary evidence to prove the contrary. The applicant had the opportunity to react to this deposition in his supplementary affidavit in opposition. In his paragraph 14, the a....