Search a Keyword!

Search our legal repository for any term from articles, statutes to cases

Central Province Farmers Group, Ltd. & Anor V. Bank of British West Africa, Ltd. & Anor (1938) LJR-WACA

Central Province Farmers Group, Ltd. & Anor V. Bank of British West Africa, Ltd. & Anor (1938)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

Consolidated suits, complicated case tried without pleadings—Claim against Bank for difference in price of Cocoa hypothecated by 1st Plaintiffs-2nd Defendants joined, also 2nd Plaintiff—Counter-claim by 2nd Defendants against 2nd Plaintiff for damages for breach of contracts—Claim by 2nd Plaintiff against 2nd Respondents-1st Plaintiffs’ claim against 1st Defendants dismissed, small part only of 1st Plaintiffs’ claim against 2nd Defendants allowed, on counterclaim 2nd Defendants recover judgment against 2nd Plaintiff, whose claim in the second suit is dismissed—Appeals by both Plaintiffs.

Held: (1) Claim of 1st plaintiffs against 1st defendants being founded on contract and there being no contract between those parties, claim misconceived and appeal dismissed.

  1. On 1st plaintiffs’ claim against 2nd defendants, finding of fact of trial Judge upheld and appeal dismissed.
  2. Trial of the issues upon the counterclaim unsatisfactory for the following reasons :—
  1. The case was so complicated that pleadings were desirable.
  2. Neither in the counterclaim nor in the opening of counsel was it disclosed whether the claim was for special or general damages.
  3. The explanation of how the amount claimed, viz : £3,800, was arrived at, was unsatisfactory.
  4. The notice of counterclaim referred to the wrong agreement.
  5. A vital document was not produced.
  6. Evidence of special damage was inadequate.

Further—doubt thrown on correctness of trial Judge’s. finding of fact on important issues—Issues upon counterclaim remitted to be reheard upon pleadings.

(4) Trial of claim in second suit of 2nd plaintiff against 2nd defendants also unsatisfactory for the following reasons:—

  1. A vital document was not produced.
  2. No clear separate judgment was given upon it, but it was treated as a set-off against the larger sum due on the counterclaim in the first suit.
  3. In the Appeal Court plaintiffs’ counsel said he had sued the wrong defendant.
See also  Amadu Wooroh Timbo V. Kofie Jalloh (1953) LJR-WACA

Claim remitted to be reheard upon pleadings.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *