NANA OSEI AKOTO vs. UTRAK CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LTD [2019]DLHC9272

Date	2019-04-05
Suit No.	SUIT NO. RPC 63/2019
Citation No.	[2019]DLHC9272

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE

HILDA KPANTEY DANGOTEY LED BY MARIAM GYASI JAWHARRY FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT

[2019]DLHC9272
																																						<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" >NANA OSEI AKOTO<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>UTRAK CAPITAL MANAGEMENT
LTD<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION), KUMASI]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

SUIT
NO.&nbsp; RPC 63/2019&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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 APRIL, 2019<o:p></o:p>

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

HILDA
KPANTEY DANGOTEY LED BY MARIAM GYASI JAWHARRY FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE, HIGH COURT
JUDGE<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

</div>By
a writ of summons, plaintiff claim against the defendant the following reliefs:<o:p></o:p>a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
An order for the payment of the sums of One
Million Ghana Cedis (GHS1,000,000.00), Six Hundred and Twenty Thousand Ghana
Cedis (GHS 620,000.00) and the interest accrued thereon by the Defendant to the
Plaintiffs under the investment management agreements afore-mentioned.<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Interest on the said amounts at the
prevailing commercial bank lending rate from the date of judgment to the date
of final payment.<o:p></o:p>c.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Damages for breach of contract.<o:p></o:p>d.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Cost.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On
15th March, 2019 the court entered interlocutory judgment in favour of the
Plaintiff for recovery of the principal sums of One Million Ghana Cedis (GHC
1,000,000.00) and Six Hundred and Twenty Thousand Ghana Cedis (GHC620,000.000)
plus interest on the said sums at the prevailing commercial bank rates from the
date of judgment (15th March, 2019) to the date of final payment.
Costs of Sixty Thousand Ghana Cedis was also awarded against the defendant. The
suit was, however, adjourned for assessment of damages.<o:p></o:p>The
law is that general damages lie for every infringement of an absolute right.
The Supreme Court held in the case of Delmas Agency Ghana Ltd v Food
Distributors International Ltd [2007/2008] SCGLR 748, 760 thus:<o:p></o:p>‘‘General
damages is such as the law will presume to be the probable or natural
consequences of the defendant’s act. It arises by inference of law and
therefore need not be proved by evidence. The law implies general damages in
every infringement of an absolute right. The catch is that only general damages
are awarded.<o:p></o:p>Where
a plaintiff has suffered a properly quantifiable loss, he must plead
specifically his loss and prove it strictly. If he does not he is not entitled
to anything unless general damages are also appropriate.’’<o:p></o:p>In
his testimony, the plaintiff stated that the refusal of the defendant to pay
out his investment has caused him great financial difficulty and has led to a
dr</main>