BENJAMIN OPPONG vs. PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL LINES AND 3 OTHERS [2018]DLHC3756

Date	2018-01-22
Suit No.	SUIT NO. CM/TRPC/0015/2016
Citation No.	[2018]DLHC3756

ERIC K. BAFFOUR ESQ. JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEY – PRESENT DELPHINA SACKEY

MS. FOR D.K. AMELEY ESQ. FOR DEFENDANT – PRESENT

[2018]DLHC3756
																																						<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" >BENJAMIN OPPONG<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL
LINES AND 3 OTHERS<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL
DIVISION), ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>SUIT NO. CM/TRPC/0015/2016&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 22ND JANUARY, 2018<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>PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEY – PRESENT DELPHINA SACKEY, <o:p></o:p>MS. FOR D.K. AMELEY, ESQ. FOR DEFENDANT – PRESENT <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>RULING<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 5th of May, 2017, the court granted in part an
application for stay of execution of the judgment of the court delivered on the
22nd of March, 2017 pending the appeal filed by the 1st defendant/Judgment
Debtor. The court stayed the execution of its judgment on condition that the
Defendant/Judgment Debtor paid 70% of the judgment debt to the Registrar of the
Court for same to be invested into an interest yielding account. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>By this application the Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor/Applicant
seeks for an order for the court to vacate its order for stay of execution of
the judgement debt on the grounds as set out in the affidavit that accompanied
the application. Chancellor Oppong Kyekyeku Kohl, the lawful attorney for the
Plaintiff, claim that the judgment of the court ordered the payment of interest
calculated at the prevailing Commercial Bank lending rate and his checks shows
that the lending rate of the Ghana Commercial Bank was 32%. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The Applicant further depose that with the Defendant/Respondent
having made a payment of Gh¢836,990.84 on the 21st July, 2017 and by
the use of 32% rate of calculation of the interest payable, the amount paid
only represented 54% of the total judgment debt and not 70%. It is further
contended that Defendant/Respondent needed to pay Ghc¢686,658.49 to make up for
the 70% of the judgment debt by the use of 32% as the interest rate. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The application has been resisted by the Defendants/Judgment
Debtors/Respondents in an affidavit in opposition deposed to by Juliet Longdon
Sowah. She claim that the interest rate used in the payment of the monies into
court was 23.5% as same was the commercial bank interest as at 22nd of
March, 2017 set by the Bank of Ghana. Defendants further challenged the
calculation of the judgment debt as in her view the period of calculation
should have been from 28th March, 2004 to 3rd May, 2017,
the date in which the judgment was stayed. There is also the challenge in
respect of the cost awarded that a computation of the total cost awarded do not
add up to Gh¢4,400.00. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In my judgement delivered on the 22nd of March, 2017, I
stated at page 16 as follows: <o:p></o:p>“I find all
the defendants jointly and severally liable for the claim of Gh¢280,000.00
being the cost of the cargo that defendants unlawfully discharged at Tema
instead of Takoradi. Plaintiff is also entitled to interest on the said amount
at the commercial bank lending rate from 2004 when the goods arrived till final
date of payment”. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It is this order for the payment of interest at the commercial
bank rate lending rate that has ignited this application by the
Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor/Applicant. It appears that the Applicant has
misunderstood the payment of interest at the commercial bank lending rate to be
the payment o</main>