MARY BAAH & 36 ORS. vs. JIM WALTER FORSTER, MRS. EMEFA G. FORSTER, SAFEWAY ESTATES AND SAFEWAY AGRO LTD [2016]DLHC4271

MARY BAAH & 36 ORS. vs. JIM WALTER FORSTER, MRS. EMEFA G. FORSTER, SAFEWAY ESTAT... [2016]DLHC4271

Date	2016-12-05
Suit No.	SUIT NO. CM/0210/2016
Citation No.	[2016]DLHC4271

SAMUEL K. A. ASIEDU

MR. DOMETI KOFI SOKPOR FOR THE PLAITNIFFS

[2016]DLHC4271
																																						<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" ><a name="OLE_LINK1">MARY BAAH &amp; 36 ORS.<o:p></o:p></a>vs.<o:p></o:p>JIM WALTER FORSTER, MRS. EMEFA G.
FORSTER, SAFEWAY ESTATES AND SAFEWAY AGRO LTD<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION), 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.
CM/0210/2016&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 5TH
DECEMBER, 2016 <o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <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>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">

SAMUEL K. A. ASIEDU,
JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT<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;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>By an amended writ of
summons issued on the 11th November, 2016, the plaintiffs claim
against the defendants:<o:p></o:p><ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="1">
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; border: none;">A declaration
 that Plaintiffs have invested in 3rd and 4th
 Defendants’ Company.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; border: none;">Recovery of
 GH¢1,384,850 by Plaintiffs.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; border: none;">Recovery of
 US$50,000 or its cedi equivalent. <o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; border: none;">Interest on the
 said amounts at the prevailing rates from 13th January, 2012 to
 date of final payment.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; border: none;">Damages.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; border: none;">Perpetual
 injunction restraining Defendants their assigns, privies workmen from
 disposing, alienating and or interfering with all the known assets of the
 Defendants.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; border: none;">Legal fees and administrative expenses.<o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>After the service of
the writ, by substitution, on the defendants, they failed to file an
appearance. The plaintiffs therefore applied and judgment in default of
appearance was entered by the court against the defendants on the 23rd
day of July, 2016 and the case fixed to a date for the assessment of damages.
In the meantime, hearing notice was served on the defendants to attend court in
order for damages to be assessed. However, the defendants failed to show up on
the 20th day of July, 2016 the date fixed for the assessment. The
plaintiffs, therefore, through their representative Samuel Dartey Junior, gave
evidence to the court in proof of their claims. In particular, the court finds
that Samuel Dartey gave evidence on his own behalf and on behalf of all the
other plaintiffs except Edward Otu Larbi, Freda Gyasenir and Amey Stephen.&nbsp; Herman Asiakoley Tettey’s name was repeated
on the list attached to the writ originally filed on the 3rd day of
June 2016. His name appeared at number 11 and also number 19. This anomaly had
been corrected on the amended writ of summons filed on the 11th
November, 2016.<o:p></o:p>From the evidence on
record, the court finds that the 1st and the 2nd
defendants are directors of the 3rd and 4th defendants’
companies. The court also finds from the evidence that the 3rd
defendant company is a registered company which is basically into real estate
development and tilapia fish farming among other lines of businesses.<o:p></o:p>There is evidence on
record to the effect that the defendants, under the guise of promoting
investment in tilapia and shrimps farming, collected various sums of money from
the plaintiffs. The court finds that the names of the plaintiffs from whom the
defendants collected money are stated on exhibit ‘A’ tendered by the
plaintiffs’ representative.<o:p></o:p>From the evidence on
record the court finds that the defendants collected from the plaintiffs
various sums of money and also issued certificates to them. This is clearly
shown on exhibits ‘B’ and ‘B1’, ‘C’ and exhibit ‘D’ series. The court</main>