HARRISON EDWARD NARTEY MARTIN vs. BARCLAYS BANK OF GHANA LIMITED [2014]DLCA8090

Date	2014-07-24
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. H1/138/2013
Citation No.	[2014]DLCA8090

KANYOKE JA (PRESIDING)

ADUAMA OSEI JA

SOWAH (MRS) JA

[2014]DLCA8090
																																						<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" >HARRISON EDWARD NARTEY MARTIN<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>BARCLAYS BANK OF GHANA LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANT)<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">

CIVIL
APPEAL NO. H1/138/2013&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
JULY, 2014<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">

KANYOKE JA (PRESIDING), ADUAMA OSEI JA, SOWAH (MRS) JA<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>ADUAMA OSEI<o:p></o:p>Harrison
Edward Nartey Martin, who shall hereafter be called “the Plaintiff”, had
been resident in Germany since <st1:metricconverter productid="1978. In" w:st="on">1978.
 In</st1:metricconverter> 1990, he opened a foreign exchange account, with
account number 1135011, with the High Street branch of Barclays Bank of Ghana
Limited, which shall hereafter be called “the
Defendant”. As alleged in the Plaintiff’s statement of claim, between the
years 1990 and 1994, he deposited the sums of DM 14,000.00 and US$900.00 into
the said account through his bankers in Germany. He however withdrew DM
1,000.00 from the account subsequently. On a visit to Ghana in 2006, he tried
to ascertain the status of the account but was told by officials of the Defendant
bank that no record of the payments he had made into the account could be
traced. After making several demands, without success, for his account to be
credited with the payments he claimed he had made, the Plaintiff, on the 13th
of April, 2011, caused a writ of summons with a statement of claim attached to
be issued against the Defendant in the Commercial Division of the High Court,
Accra, for reliefs as follows:&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>“(a) The sum of Thirteen
Thousand Deutsch Marks.<o:p></o:p>“(b) The sum of Nine Hundred
United States Dollars.<o:p></o:p>“(c) Accruing interest on the
amounts from 1994 until date of judgment.<o:p></o:p>“(d) Damages for Emotional
Distress”.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In
the statement of defence filed on behalf of the Defendant, it denied that the
deposits made into the account by the Plaintiff amounted to DM14,000.00 and US$900.00.
The Defendant alleged that the payments the Plaintiff made into the account
rather amounted to DM11,461.00, and that those payments were made between July,
1990 and 28th June, 1995. Between December, 1990 and August, 1995,
however, the Plaintiff made withdrawals amounting to DM11,200.00 from the
account. In respect of the dollar deposit alleged by the Plaintiff, the
Defendant stated that since the Plaintiff maintained a deutsch mark account, it
was impossible to credit the account with dollars. The Defendant alleged that
after deducting normal account maintenance fees and transaction charges from
the Plaintiff’s account, the credit balance on the account as at September,
1995 amounted to DM11.67. Since the balance of DM11.67 was not sufficient to
pay for the customary charges relating to the operation of the account, the
same was closed. The Defendant contended therefore that the Plaintiff was not
entitled to any of the reliefs claimed by him.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>When
efforts at settling the matter at the pre-trial conference failed, the
following issues were certified by the pre-trial judge as the issues for trial:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>“1. Whether or not the total
amount the Plaintiff transferred into his Barclays account no. 1135011 was
DM14,000 plus US$900 or DM11,661.<o:p></o:p>“2. Whether or not the total
amount withdrawn from the Plaintiff’s Barclays account no. 1135011 was DM1,000
or DM11,200.<o:p></o:p>“3. Any other issue(s) arising
from the pleadings”.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In
its judgment delivered on the 21st of March, 2012, the trial Court
held that the Plaintiff had proved his transfer of DM14,000.00 and US$900.00 to
the Defendant between March, 1990 and 1994, and that the Defendant’s evidence
as to its record of the transactions had no probative value. The trial Court
held further that the Plaintiff had proved entitlement to damages for emotional
distress and awarded him DM13,000.00 and US$900.00 under that head. Costs in
the sum of GH¢10,000.00 were also awarded in favour of the Plaintiff against
the Defendant.<o:p></o:p>Aggrieved
by the judgment of the trial Court, the Defendant has appealed against the same
to this Court, and this </main>