GHANA PROTEIN LTD. vs. RAANAN FISH FEED WEST AFRICA [2016]DLCA4821

Date	2016-02-25
Suit No.	SUIT NO: H1/108/2015
Citation No.	[2016]DLCA4821

F. KUSI-APPIAH J.A (PRESIDING)

K. A. ACQUAYE J.A.

S. DZAMEFE J.A

MR. PRINCE KWEKU HODO FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

MR. MIRACLE ATTACHEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

[2016]DLCA4821
																																						<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" >GHANA PROTEIN LTD. <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>RAANAN FISH FEED WEST
AFRICA <o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</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:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

SUIT NO: H1/108/2015&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 25TH FEBRUARY,
2016<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR. PRINCE KWEKU HODO FOR
THE DEFENDANT/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">

MR.
MIRACLE ATTACHEY FOR THE 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:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

F.
KUSI-APPIAH J.A (PRESIDING), K. A. ACQUAYE J.A., S. 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:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
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">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>K.
A. ACQUAYE, J.A.<o:p></o:p>This
is the judgment in respect of an interlocutory appeal filed against the ruling
of a High Court in Accra which dismissed an application by the
defendant/appellant to expunge part of the evidence led by the
plaintiff/respondent from the record.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiff/respondent issued a writ of summons claiming against the
defendant/appellant special and general damages and compensation in the sum of
US$187,500 or its equivalent in Ghana Cedis for direct loss and damage suffered
by the plaintiff as a result of contaminated fish oil sold it by the defendant.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiff/respondent’s case was that she purchased fish oil from the
defendant/appellant which she used to coat fish meal for sale to fish farmers
but the fish oil was contaminated with anizidine more than six times its normal
level as a result of which the fishes fed with the meal died.&nbsp; This led to the plaintiff/respondent withdrawing
the rest of the fish feed from the market and compensating the fish farmers for
their loss hence his claims.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
defendant/appellant’s defence was that the plaintiff/respondent knew that the
oil was a waste product which had not been tested and ought to have tested it
to establish its suitability for her purpose and that the longer the oil stayed
the more it deteriorated.&nbsp; The
defendant/appellant also led evidence seeking to establish that the fish died
not from anizidine but from aflatoxin poisoning.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>After
the plaintiff/respondent had closed her case and the defendant/appellant had
given evidence and called two witnesses, the plaintiff/respondent filed a
motion for leave to recall the plaintiff to testify, according to Counsel for
the plaintiff/respondent, in answer to DW2’s evidence.&nbsp; The motion was heard two days after it had
been served on Counsel for the defendant and in his absence that same day the
plaintiff/respondent was recalled to testify where upon he tendered two
Exhibits J and J1.&nbsp; The suit was
adjourned for cross-examination and Counsel for the defendant/appellant used
two days in cross-examining the recalled plaintiff/respondent.&nbsp; Thereafter the defendant/appellant applied by
motion to the trial Court to expunge the evidence and the exhibits tendered by
the plaintiff/</main>