[2013]DLCA3636 Login to Read Full Case <span style="font-size: 18px !important;"><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";color:#00B0F0">SEGA EXPORTS LTD.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";color:#00B0F0">DART HILLS LTD.</span></b><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Book Antiqua"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Book Antiqua";color:#00B0F0"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Book Antiqua", serif;">[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]</span><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-bidi-font-family:Tahoma"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;border:none; mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast">SUIT NO. H1/197</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Book Antiqua","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-fareast;mso-bidi-font-family:Tahoma">/2012 </span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast"> </span><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Book Antiqua", serif;">DATE: 2</span><sup><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-bidi-font-family:Tahoma">ND</span></sup><span style="font-size:10.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;mso-bidi-font-family: Tahoma"> MAY, 2013<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;tab-stops: .5in 1.0in 257.25pt"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast">COUNSEL: <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">MS. RENNE KUSAH FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">MR. ROBERT YARTEY FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast">CORAM: <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">ASARE KORANG, J.A DUOSE, J.A. AND ADJEI, J.A<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%; border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in; mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">JUDGMENT</span></b><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:Tahoma"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:.25in;text-align:justify"><b><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">ADJEI,J.A.:</span></u></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:.25in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">This appeal is against the judgment of the High Court (Commercial Division) delivered on 29<sup>th</sup> November, 2010. Both parties are dissatisfied with the said judgment and each of them is praying for the judgment to be set aside but on different grounds. However, the plaintiff failed to file its Notice of Variation of judgment within time and same was struck out. The brief facts of the case were that the parties herein were trading partners. The plaintiff is a registered external company engaged in the export of goods into Ghana for sale to its customers. The defendant was one of the plaintiff’s customers. As per their terms of trade, the plaintiff sent the defendant inspection pictures of the goods to be shipped to it and upon confirmation by the defendant, the goods were shipped. As per the terms of the trade, the defendant was required to pay for the goods of its orders when the goods arrived at the Tema Port. The defendant would then go to its bankers; Merchant Bank and pay for the cost of the goods and take delivery of the clearing documents from its said bank. In the months of April and May, the defendant ordered for goods made up of roofing nails, louvre glass, mosquito netting and pickaxe worth USD162, 108.75.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:.25in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">On arrival of the goods, the defendant did not pay for it and did not also go for the clearing documents from its bankers. The defendant assigned several reasons why it did not pay for the goods. When the matter was in court, another company expressed the desire to buy the goods and same were sold to them. The trial High Court Judge in her judgment awarded nominal damages of GH¢5,000.00 to the plaintiff for breach of contract, interest charges of $14,363.43 and lawyers fees of USD7,000.00. The court further dismissed the defendant’s counterclaim as an afterthought and devoid of merits. The defendant/appellant who would be referred to in this appeal as the defendant filed four grounds of appeal against the judgment. The grounds of appeal are as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:.25in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif""> “i. <b><i>The judgment is against the weight of evidence.<o:p></o:p></i></b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:.25in; margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">ii. The Judge erred in her award of $14,363.43 as interest charge as same was not based on any specific proven principal nor founded on the appropriate application of the principles relating to the award of interest. <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:.25in; margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">iii. The Judge erred by granting the claim of $7,000.00 for lawyer’s fees when same had not been proven by the Plaintiff/Respondent.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:.25in; margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">iv. The Judge erred when after finding that the Defendant/Appellant had a right to reject the goods based on a shortage in quantity supplied, rather held that there had been a breach of contract by the Defendant resulting in the award of damages of GH¢5, 000.00 against it”.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:.25in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The parties per Exhibit A series entered into a contract as to the goods the plaintiff was to supply to the defendant. In Exhibit A1 the parties agreed inter alia, that the plaintiff must send inspection pictures of the roofing nails to be shipped to the defendant before shipment. The parties further agreed that the quality, packing, size and everything should be same as plaintiff regularly shipped to the defendant. In exhibit “A3” the parties agreed that the plaintiff was to ship mosquito netting and inspection pictures must be sent before shipment. It was further agreed that the mosquito netting must be the same as the latest one the plaintiff shipped to the defendant and the only difference was that the new mosquito n