KWASI ADDO (Trading under the name and style Power-Soft Systems) vs. MULTICHOICE GH. LTD AND ETRANZACT LTD

The plaintiff, Kwasi Addo, trading as Power-Soft Systems, claimed that after proposing to develop an electronic payment solution for DSTV subscription payments, the 1st defendant referred him to the 2nd defendant, which allegedly collaborated with him over about two years in developing and testing the system. He contended that this collaboration, together with the defendants’ conduct, created a binding contract or at least estopped them from denying one. He further alleged that after pilot sales of scratch cards bearing the 1st defendant’s logo, the defendants cut him off from the system and the 1st defendant published notices warning customers not to buy the cards, thereby breaching the agreement and defaming him. The defendants denied any concluded contract, maintained that the plaintiff had not completed the required internal approval and documentation processes, and asserted that the plaintiff used the 1st defendant’s logo without authorization. [Portions relied on: paras. 1.1–2.7; 3.1–3.4]

1.0 Background 1.1 Though the facts in the suit are wide and extensive, indeed contrasting; culminating in like manner varied issues that the pretrial court set down for trial, my candid opinion nonetheless is that, the main issue, indeed the principle of law at the heart of the contestation involves and indeed revolves largely around the primary issue of whether from the relationship of the parties in the suit, there can be found a valid enforceable contract that can form the basis of the suit. 1.2 The parties in the suit are into the electronic information and tele communication industry. Plaintiff is an individual. He commenced the suit under the business name PowerSoft Systems. He claims to be the proprietor of the enterprise. Defendants are corporate entities who respectively provide television subscription management services for Multichoice Africa Limited, and electronic transaction payment processing platform. 2.0 Plaintiff’s case 2.1 The facts of plaintiff’s case...