REX OWUSU MARFO vs. JOY INDUSTRIES LTD. [2021]DLCA10811

Date	2021-06-17
Suit No.	SUIT NO HI/ 34/ 2020
Citation No.	[2021]DLCA10811

CECILIA H. SOWAH JA. (PRESIDING)

ANTHONY OPPONG JA

ANGELINA MENSAH- HOMIAH JA

GOLDA DENYO ESQ FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

FRANCIS POLLEY ESQ FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

[2021]DLCA10811
																																						<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" >REX OWUSU MARFO<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>JOY INDUSTRIES LTD.<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, KOFORIDUA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

SUIT NO HI/ 34/ 2020&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&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: 17TH JUNE 2021<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>GOLDA DENYO ESQ FOR
DEFENDANT/APPELLANT<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

FRANCIS POLLEY ESQ FOR
PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>CECILIA H. SOWAH JA. (PRESIDING),
ANTHONY OPPONG JA, ANGELINA MENSAH- HOMIAH JA<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="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:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;ANTHONY
OPPONG JA:<o:p></o:p>The Respondent is a Ghanaian music
composer, music producer, writer, publisher and performer of no mean repute. He
delved into the music industry from 1982. He has 15 albums to his credit. In
2004, he released an album titled ‘ADJALA’.
That album contains the successful song ‘DA
DA DI DA’. The Respondent registered and/or declared the album and the song
with the erstwhile Copyright Society of Ghana (COSGA) under the then Copyright
Law, 1985 (PNDCL 110).<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;On or about 2013, to his dismay and
chagrin, Respondent discovered that the Appellant had been commercially using
part of his work from the song ‘DA DA DI
DA’ to promote or advertise its product JOY DADI BITTERS, without seeking nor obtaining the permission or
license from Respondent, the right holder/owner.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The advertisement used to be aired on
some radio stations at least four times a day. It used to be usually aired on
the stations’ morning show programs which had wide coverage and in some
instances were broadcast by several affiliate radio stations across Ghana. It
was also available on the internet which connotes worldwide coverage.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;It was the case of Respondent that
appellant’s failure to obtain permission or license from him before using part
of his work for advertising its product constituted contumacious breach of his
copyright. Respondent therefore sued appellant for infringing on his copyright
and for damages for that matter. It must be mentioned that before respondent
sued appellant, the respondent gave appellant an opportunity to see the
respondent for the latter to issue him the requisite license but appellant
spurned that amicable gesture.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The appellant denied using the
respondent’s work commercially to advertise its product. It claimed that its
advertisement contained syllables or tonic solfas derived from the name of its
product, ‘JOY BITTERS’. <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;After the trial, the High Court,
Koforidua delivered judgment on 29th January 2020 in favour of the Respondent.
The learned trial High Court judge made an order of perpetual injunction
restraining the appellant whether by its directors, officers, agents, servants
or assigns whatsoever from using without the respondent’s license the work entitled,
‘DA DA DI DA’ or otherwise
infringing the Respondent’s copyright in the said work. The Court below also
awarded in favour of respondent general damages of GHC200,000.00.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The appellant registered its
dissatisfaction of the said judgment by filing notice of appeal on 12th
March, 2020 found at page 276 of the record of appeal. The appeal attacked the
entire judgment on the omnibus ground that the judgment was against the weight
of the evidence.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The Respondent was also dissatisfied
with the quantum of damages awarded and so in accordance with Rule 15(1) of the
Court of Appeal Rules, C.I.19, he filed notice of intention to seek an order
for the damages awarded to be varied by enhancing it.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;An appellant who seeks to have a
judgment reversed or set aside on the ground that the judgment is against the
weight of the evidence bears the burden to clearly demonstrate any lapses in
the judgment appealed against.&nbsp; At page
691 of the case DJIN V. MUSAH BAAKO(2007-2008) 1 SCGLR 686, this is
how the Supreme Court put it:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“
It has been held in several decided cases that where an (as in the instant
case) appellant complains that a judgment is against the weight of evidence, he
is implying that there were certain pieces of evidence on the record which, if
applied in his favour, could have changed the decision in his favour, or
certain pieces of evidence have been wrongly applied against him. The onus is
on such an appellant to clearly and properly demonstrate to the appellate court
the lapses in the judgment being appealed against.”<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The duty to demonstrate the lapses of
the judgment by the appellant springs from the fundamental presumption that the
judgment of the trial court is correct. It will therefore take displacement of
that presumption by the appellant before he can secure success for the appeal
grounded on the argument that the judgment is against the weight of the
evidence.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;O</main>