DOMINS FISHERIES LTD. vs. BREMEN-VEGESACKER FISCHEREI [1973]DLHC2378

Date	1973-07-25
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1973]DLHC2378

ABBAN J.

T. A. NELSON-COFIE FOR THE PLAINTIFFS.

P. A. ADJETEY FOR THE DEFENDANTS.

[1973]DLHC2378
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" >DOMINS FISHERIES LTD.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;vs. <o:p></o:p>BREMEN-VEGESACKER FISCHEREI <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT,
ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1973]
2 GLR 490<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

DATE:
25 JULY 1973.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

T. A. NELSON-COFIE FOR THE PLAINTIFFS.<o:p></o:p>

P. A. ADJETEY FOR THE DEFENDANTS.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

ABBAN J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ABBAN J.<o:p></o:p>The claim
of the plaintiffs, as amended, is for (a) a declaration that the defendants
have by a contract sold to the plaintiffs a fishing motor vessel called The
Paderborn now lying at Tema Fishing Harbour, (b) an order for specific
performance of the said contract, and (c) general damages for loss of use; or
in the alternative, damages for breach of contract and refund of the deposit
paid by plaintiffs to the defendants towards the purchase of the vessel, plus
interest at the rate of ten per cent per annum.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
defendants are a foreign company and they own the motor vessel, called The
Paderborn. The vessel was brought to Tema Harbour apparently for fishing under
the management of two Europeans — Tandorf and Grunther Thomas. While in Ghana
these two gentlemen, on behalf of the defendants, tried to sell the vessel to a
Ghanaian company called Eben Fisheries Ltd., and it appears they allowed the
directors of this company, or some persons connected with it, to operate the
vessel for some time. One Comfort Tetteh alias Mrs. Comfort Dodoo who gave
evidence in this case, as the first witness for the plaintiffs, stated that she
advanced about ¢12,000.00 to those two Europeans on behalf of the said Eben
Fisheries Ltd. She also spent another ¢6,000.00 in making some repairs to the
vessel and in buying ice and fuel for the running of the vessel. Mrs. Comfort
Dodoo said she was not one of the directors of Eben Fisheries Ltd. But the
¢6,000.00 spent on the repairs, ice and fuel, as well as the ¢12,000.00
advanced to the two gentlemen, were to be treated as a loan to the Eben
Fisheries Ltd. The understanding was that the defendants would give credit to
Eben Fisheries Ltd. for the total sum of ¢18,000.00 when the purchase price of
the vessel was finally agreed upon. Mrs. Dodoo, being a creditor to Eben
Fisheries Ltd. was exercising some control over the affairs of that company,
and was probably hoping to have some interest in the vessel when it was
eventually purchased by Eben Fisheries. Ltd.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In the
long run, however, the two Europeans left Ghana without completing the
negotiations for the sale of the vessel, and without refunding the amount of
¢18,000.00, either to Eben Fisheries Ltd. or to Mrs. Comfort Dodoo. They left
the vessel in charge of one Mr. W. D. Lobban, an accountant in Accra, who knew
of the negotiations which had taken place between the two gentlemen and Eben
Fisheries Ltd. Mrs. Dodoo was not given any document to show that she had any
claim or lien on the vessel, and it was obvious that she was going to have
considerable difficulty in recovering the ¢18,000.00 from Eben Fisheries Ltd.
as the directors of that company were, by that time, quarrelling among
themselves and the company seemed to be collapsing.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It was in
this dilemma that Mrs. Comfort Dodoo consulted Mr. M. in his capacity as a
solicitor. She was still interested in the vessel and the defendants were still
bent on selling it. Mr. M. therefore advised Mrs. Comfort Dodoo to form a
company of her own and after the formation of the said company, that company
should then negotiate with the defendants for the purchase of the vessel. This
advice was accepted by Mrs. Comfort Dodoo. Thus, on 28 October 1970, a new
company called Domins Fisheries Ltd., the plaintiffs herein, was incorporated
with Mr. M., Mrs. Comfort Dodoo and Mrs. Letitia Dodoo as its directors. Mr. M.
was also made the secretary of the company. The plaintiffs, as a new company,
had their certificate to commence business as from 2 November 1970. But before
2 November 1970, Mr. M. had already got in touch with Messrs. Q. &amp; B., a
firm of solicitors, and had expressed the desire of the plaintiffs to purchase
the vessel.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Messrs.
Q. &amp; B. were at that time acting as the solicitors for the defendants, and
had even issued a writ of summons on </main>