EDC STOCKBROKERS vs. CIG MICROFINANCE AND 7 OTHERS [2017]DLHC3693

Date	2017-06-29
Suit No.	SUIT NO. CM/0080/15
Citation No.	[2017]DLHC3693

GEORGE K. KOOMSON JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

FRED ASARE DANQUAH FOR THE PLAINTIFF

[2017]DLHC3693
																																						<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" >EDC STOCKBROKERS<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>CIG MICROFINANCE AND 7
OTHERS<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL
DIVISION), ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>SUIT NO. CM/0080/15&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 29TH JUNE, 2017<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>FRED ASARE DANQUAH FOR THE PLAINTIFF <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>GEORGE K. KOOMSON JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt">

</div>JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt">

</div>On the 17th November, 2015, the plaintiff filed a writ
of summons against the defendants asking for the following reliefs: <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;
mso-pagination:none;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Recovery of the sum of GHS
37,095,026.02. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;
mso-pagination:none;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Interest on the said sum of GHS
37,095,026.02 calculated at the prevailing Commercial Bank Rate or the agreed
investment rate, whichever is higher from the 13th day of November,
2015, to date of final payment. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;
mso-pagination:none;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">c.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Further and in the alternative
an order to lift the veil of incorporation on 2nd, 3rd, 4th,
5th, 6th, 7th and 8th defendants
and hold them jointly and severally liable for the liability of the 1st defendant.
<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;
mso-pagination:none;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">d.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Cost inclusive of legal and
administrative cost. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On the 11th December, 2015 the defendants entered
appearance through their lawyer. Then on the 7th January, 2016 the
defendants filed a statement of defence and counterclaim. On the 21st November,
2016 the court ordered parties to file their respective witness statements and
check-lists within 21 days. The defendants failed to comply with this order.
Accordingly, the court struck out the statement of defence and counterclaim
filed by the defendants during case management on the 22nd May,
2017. The case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff and the 1st defendant
entered into an investment transaction whereby the plaintiff was engaged by the
1st defendant to act as arranger and financial advisor for the
issuance of Ten (10 Million Ghana Cedi (GHS 10,000,000.00) one year rollable
capital. This agreement was executed on the 25th April, 2013. In
fulfilment of its obligation under the said agreement, the plaintiff contended
that it raised funds over and above Ten Million Ghana Cedi. At the request of 1st
defendant, plaintiff contends further that it raised additional funds for
the 1st defendant. As a result, the 1st defendant issued
out debenture certificates. All payments made to the 1st defendant
by the plaintiff were made through the bank. It is the further case of the
plaintiff that on the 13th August, 2013, the 1st defendant
introduced the 3rd defendant to the plaintiff and directed the
plaintiff to carry out all transactions pertaining to 1st defendant
through the 3rd defendant. Subsequent to this, the plaintiff further
contends that the 3rd defendant transacted business in the name of 1st
defendant. This included the issuance of debenture certificates jointly
in the name of plaintiff and customers of the plaintiff for various sums of
money 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants received
from the plaintiff. <o:p></o:p>