MAERSK GHANA LIMITED vs. JEMT COMPANY LIMITED [2012]DLCA8633

Date	2012-05-24
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL: SUIT NO: H1/96/2011
Citation No.	[2012]DLCA8633

MARIAMA OWUSU J.A. (PRESIDING)

IRENE C. DANQUAH J.A.

SENYO DZAMEFE J.A.

MR. CHARLES HAYIBOR FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

MR. MICHAEL OWUSU-AWUAH FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

[2012]DLCA8633
																																						<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" >MAERSK GHANA LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p>JEMT COMPANY LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">CIVIL APPEAL: SUIT NO: H1/96/2011 &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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE: 24TH
MAY, 2012<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR.
CHARLES HAYIBOR FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

MR.
MICHAEL OWUSU-AWUAH FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

MARIAMA
OWUSU J.A. (PRESIDING), IRENE C.
DANQUAH J.A., SENYO DZAMEFE J.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

</div>MARIAMA
OWUSU, J.A.:<o:p></o:p>This
is an appeal against the decision of the High Court, Tema dated 25-2-2010. In
the said decision, the court entered judgment for the plaintiff against defendant
in the sum of GH¢486,000 (486 million old cedis) plus interest at the
prevailing bank rate to be calculated from 17th of March, 2004 (the
date the plaintiff made a demand for the release of its cargo but could not
have it) to date of judgment. &nbsp;Cost of
GH¢5,000 to the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>Dissatisfied
with the decision of the High Court, the defendant appealed to this court.<o:p></o:p>The
grounds of appeal are:<o:p></o:p>a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The
judgment is against the evidence.<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The
learned trial Judge, with great respect, erred when she held that the
respondent’s goods were in the custody and control of the appellant.<o:p></o:p>c.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The
learned Judge erred when she made a finding that the appellant’s intention to
misappropriate the respondent’s cargo can be reasonably inferred from its act
of notifying the respondent of its intention of having the cargo auctioned
within 3 weeks and before the three weeks could expire, listing the cargo as
frozen chicken for destruction.<o:p></o:p>d.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The
learned Judge erred when she made a finding that the appellant was responsible
for the disappearance of the respondent’s goods.<o:p></o:p>e.