TATIANA BOYA vs. MARIO DE CATALDO AND COTTAGE ITALIA INDUSTRIES LTD [2014]DLCA2789

Date	2014-07-31
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. H1/109/2014
Citation No.	[2014]DLCA2789

KANYOKEJ.A. (PRESIDING)

KORBIEH J.A.

GYAN

J.A.

NANA ATO DADZIE FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT

KWAME AKUFFO FOR DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS

[2014]DLCA2789
																																						<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" >TATIANA BOYA<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MARIO DE CATALDO AND
COTTAGE ITALIA INDUSTRIES LTD.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

CIVIL
APPEAL NO. H1/109/2014&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: 31TH JULY, 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&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; <o:p></o:p>NANA ATO DADZIE FOR
PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT,<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

KWAME
AKUFFO FOR DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS<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 1.0pt 0in">

</div>JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>KANYOKE, J.A.:&nbsp;
This is an appeal by the plaintiff/appellant (hereinafter
referred to as the plaintiff) against the ruling of the Commercial Division of
the High Court, Accra dated 30th September 2013 in which the
plaintiff claimed reliefs relating to her alleged beneficial interest in the
business and operation of the 2nd defendant – a company known as
Cottage Italia Industries Ltd.&nbsp; At the
conclusion of the evidence of the plaintiff and her sole witness, counsel for
the 1st defendant/respondent (hereinafter called the 1st
defendant), invited the court to entertain and uphold a submission that the 1st
defendant had no case to answer.&nbsp; The
court granted leave to the said counsel to file the submission of no case
without putting the 1st defendant or his counsel to an election as
normally procedurally required.&nbsp; However,
counsel for the plaintiff raised no objection to the invitation to the court to
entertain the submission of no case to answer even though he was present in
court.&nbsp; In fact, counsel for the
plaintiff fully participated in the proceedings by filing a response to the
submission of no case to answer.&nbsp; On the
30th day of September 2013, the trial court gave its ruling
upholding the submission of no case and consequently dismissed the plaintiff’s
claims but gave the 1st defendant the option to establish his
counterclaim if he wished.&nbsp; It is against
this ruling that the plaintiff has invited us in this appeal to set it aside
and in its place, enter judgment for the plaintiff.&nbsp; The sole ground of appeal is the general and
omnibus ground that the judgment/ruling is against the weight of the evidence
on record for even though the notice of appeal has indicated that further
grounds of appeal would be filed upon receipt of a copy of the ruling, no such
further or additional grounds were filed.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Before
proceeding to deal with the merits of the appeal, I think it is appropriate to
set out the particulars of the claim and give a brief facts of the case
culminating in this appeal.&nbsp; By an
amended writ of summons (see page 377 of the record of appeal (ROA)), the
plaintiff claimed the following reliefs at the court below:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>“a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Declaration
that plaintiff is the beneficial interest holder of 13,347.04 shares in the
company as at 31/12/2009.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Declaration
that plaintiff obtained an additional fifty percent of defendant’s shares in
their company Cottage Italia Industries Ltd. by virtue of Deed of Transfer
dated 8th June, 2010 registered as No. LVB 13735/A/10. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>c.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Specific
performance of the terms of the Deed of Transfer of one hundred and fifty-three
thousand six hundred and one Ghana cedis, ninety-nine pesewas shares in the
undertaking called Cottage Italia Industries Ghana Ltd. to plaintiff.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>d.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Declaration
that 1st defendant cannot unilaterally deal with 2nd
defendant company without reference to the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>e.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Declaration
that plaintiff as a stipendiary officer of 2nd defendant company
covering the period plaintiff started working for the 2nd defendant
company to date of commencement of this action.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>f.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Accounts
of the company from 2001 to 2011.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>g.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Perpetual
injunction against the 1st defendant unilaterally disposing of the properties
of the company.<o:p></o:p></main>