ROYAL BENEFICIARIES ASSOCIATION vs. ESTHER OKAILEY ASARE, AFUA BABEY, ISAAC ASANTE AND EDWARD OWUSU ASARE [2015]DLCA8051

ROYAL BENEFICIARIES ASSOCIATION vs. ESTHER OKAILEY ASARE, AFUA BABEY, ISAAC ASAN... [2015]DLCA8051

Date	2015-12-03
Suit No.	SUIT NO: H1/191/2013
Citation No.	[2015]DLCA8051

OWUSU M. J.A. (PRESIDING)

GYAESAYOR J.A.

SOWAH J.A.

MR. SAMUEL QUANSAH ANSAH FOR 1ST

3RD & 4TH DEFENDANTS/ RESPONDENTS

MR. FRANCIS KWAME YEBOAH FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT

[2015]DLCA8051
																																						<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" >ROYAL BENEFICIARIES ASSOCIATION<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF
/ 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>ESTHER OKAILEY ASARE, AFUA
BABEY, ISAAC ASANTE AND EDWARD OWUSU ASARE<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS / RESPONDENTS)<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">

SUIT NO: H1/191/2013&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;DATE: 3RD DECEMBER, 2015<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR. SAMUEL QUANSAH ANSAH FOR 1ST, 3RD
&amp; 4TH DEFENDANTS/&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
RESPONDENTS<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. FRANCIS KWAME
YEBOAH FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT<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">

OWUSU M. J.A.
(PRESIDING), GYAESAYOR J.A., SOWAH J.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <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">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>SOWAH, J.A:<o:p></o:p>The plaintiff/appellant is a company limited by guarantee
and purported to be a Welfare Association whose functions included borrowing
from the commercial banks for the benefit of its members. It sued the
defendants/respondents for failing to repay financial assistance in accordance
with agreed terms. The 1st defendant admitted receiving money from the
plaintiff but she and the other defendants who had stood as guarantors filed a
counterclaim resisting plaintiff's claim and urging the trial court to find the
loan transaction illegal and unenforceable in terms of the Moneylenders Act
1941, Cap 176. They further urged the court to find the interest and charges on
the facility harsh, excessive and unconscionable and to reopen the transaction
under the Loans Recovery Act Cap 175. [See pages 149-150 of Record]. Thus one
of the issues for trial was whether or not the transaction between the parties
was illegal and unenforceable under the provisions of Cap 176 and ought
therefore to be set aside as void, or it was a lawful transaction which the
court ought to enforce.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In the judgment dated 2nd December 2008 to be
found at pages 188-209 of the Record, the trial court found on the facts and
the evidence that the plaintiff was engaged in the active business of money
lending by definition of section 1 of Cap 176 and held the transaction to be an
illegal contract as it was prohibited by law to conduct the business of money
lending without a license. On this premise the contract exhibit D was declared
void and unenforceable. The 1st defendant had prayed for the reopening of the
loan transaction in accordance with section 3(1) of Cap 175 but the trial judge
disagreed that this law was applicable to the circumstances of the case. She
therefore refused to reopen the transaction for the purpose of granting any
relief there under.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The trial court also held the transaction to be
unenforceable on two other grounds: It agreed with the 1st defendant’s
complaint of fraudulent inducement through misrepresentations. It also held
that as the plaintiff had been set up as a guarantee company, by section 10 of
the Companies Act 1963, Act 179 it ought not to have conducted business for the
purpose of making profits. It therefore dismissed the plaintiff's claim in
totality. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Dissatisfied with the
judgment, the plaintiff/appellant filed her Notice of Appeal on 9th
Dec 2008, praying that the whole judgment be overturned, the agreement between
the parties be enforced, and the reliefs sought in the lower court be restored
and granted. The grounds of appeal are as follows:<o:p></o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The judgment is against the
weight of the evidence adduced at the trial.<o:p></o:p>