GHANA HOME LOANS LTD (PLAINTIFF) vs. VIVIAN ADJEI (DEFENDANT) [2017]DLHC7302

Date	2017-02-16
Suit No.	SUIT NO. BFS/374/11
Citation No.	[2017]DLHC7302

HIS LORDSHIP GEORGE K. KOOMSON (J).

YAW ESHUN FOR PLAINTIFF

RICHMOND N. SACKAH FOR DEFENDANT

[2017]DLHC7302
																																						<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 HOME
LOANS LTD<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>VIVIAN ADJEI<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p>[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. BFS/374/11&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 16TH
FEBRUARY, 2017<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL: <o:p></o:p>YAW
ESHUN FOR PLAINTIFF<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">

RICHMOND
N. SACKAH FOR DEFENDANT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HIS
LORDSHIP GEORGE K. KOOMSON (J).<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 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-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>The Plaintiff entered into a written contract with
the Defendant dated 8th February, 2011, in which the Plaintiff
approved a facility in the sum of USD67,500.00 to the Defendant at the request
of the Defendant.&nbsp; The rate of interest
agreed to by the parties is 12% per annum.&nbsp;
The facility was to be amortized over the period of the facility
commencing from the date of disbursement.&nbsp;
It is alleged that the parties further agreed that in the event of a
default, the rate of interest applicable to the facility will be 18.50% per
annum.&nbsp; The inability of the Defendant to
service the said facility as agreed to in the contract of 8th
February, 2011 has brought the parties to Court with the Plaintiff asking for
the following reliefs:<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That
the Defendant pays the Plaintiff the amount of USD66,526.75 being the
outstanding balance on the loan facility granted to the Defendant.<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Interest
on the said amount from 19th October, 2011to date of final payment
at a rate of 18.50% per annum.<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Costs
occasioned by this action.<o:p></o:p>It is noted from the onset that the Defendant
through her counsel participated in the trial.&nbsp;
At the close of the Plaintiff’s case, the Defendant was ordered to open
her defence on the 15th June, 2016.&nbsp;
Since then, the matter suffered series of adjournments, all at the
instance of the defence.&nbsp; The Court
obliged the defence on all these occasions due to the fact that counsel for the
Defendant made the Court to believe that the Defendant, who is resident in the
United Kingdom (UK) had undergone some surgery and could therefore not travel
to testify. On the 14th December, 2016, defence counsel gave a firm
assurance to the Court that the Defendant would be testifying at the next
adjourned date. &nbsp;Defence counsel
therefore prayed for an adjournment, which was obliged, to 18th
January, 2017.&nbsp; The Court in accepting
the prayer of defence counsel, noted that in the event the Defendant fails to
testify on the 18th January, 2017, it shall be deemed that the
defence has abandoned their right to state their case.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>On the 18th January, 2017, the Defendant
was absent from Court.&nbsp; Counsel for Defendant
informed the Court that the Defendant was unable to attend Court to
testify.&nbsp; The Defendant also did not call
witnesses.&nbsp; It was accordingly deemed
that the Defendant did not intend to testify or call witnesses in proof of her
case.&nbsp; It is significant to note that the
Defendant was on the 18th January, 2017 represented in Court by one
Solomon Tetteh.<o:p></o:p>Accordingly, the Court ordered both lawyers to
address the Court by filing their respective written submissions.&nbsp; Plaintiff’s counsel filed his submissions but
defence counsel failed to file his.&nbsp; If
it was filed at all, the Courts record does not show that the said submissions
has been filed.<o:p></o:p>The case of the Plaintiff in the matter is a
straight forward one.&nbsp; The Plaintiff
contended that on the 8th February, 2011, at the request of Defendant,
the Plaintiff approved a loan facility in the sum of USD67,500.00 </main>