The Supreme Court yesterday dismissed an application filed by SG-SSB Bank Limited which contested a claim by CBAM Inc., an investment services firm, that the bank owed it 1 million dollars.
The court, by four-one majority decision dismissed the bank's application and accordingly affirmed the Court of Appeal's decision which ordered the bank to present its statement of accounts on the actual amount it owed the plaintiff.
While the plaintiff, Captain Ebo Acquah (Rtd), the Chief Executive of CBAM Inc., 1 million dollar, the bank insisted it owed 841,191 dollars.
The bank therefore referred the matter to the Supreme Court for determination on the actual amount it owed while the matter was at the Fast Track High Court for the enforcement of an order by the Court of Appeal for the bank to present its statement of accounts on the actual amount it owed the plaintiff.
The issue of contention between the two parties centered in a contract the plaintiff and the defendant entered into in December 1999.
Under the agreement, CBAM offered too initiate and link the bank to MoneyGram, a world wide money transfer service, while the bank agreed to act as an agent of MoneyGram.
After several months of litigation, the case travelled to the Supreme Court after the issue had been dealt with by the Court of Appeal which ruled in favour of Captain Acquah's company, CBAM Inc.
The presiding judge, Justice W.A Atugubah upheld SG-SSB's application but Mrs Justice Georgina T. Wood, Justice Julius Ansah, Justice R.T Aninakwa and Justice S.K Asianah dissented with their colleague and accordingly dismissed the application.
Stating her reasons for dismissing the appeal, Justice Wood said the bank enjoyed the fruits of CBAM Inc., and could therefore not turn around and claim otherwise.
She said the bank had waived its rights and condoned with the alleged breaches committed by the respondent.
For his part, Justice Asiamah said the bank to complain and accordingly upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal.
Messrs Justice Ansah and Aninakwa agreed with Mrs Justice Wood Asiamah that the Court of Appeal's decision was valid and must be adhered to be the bank.
Disagreeing with his colleagues Justice Atugubah said there was an atmosphere of cordiality between the parties while doing business and thus the rights of SG-SSB could not have been said there of cordiality between the parties while doing business and thus the rights of SG-SSB could not have been said to have been waived.
He said CBAM Inc refused to adhere to portions of the agreement resulting in the termination of the contract.
Justice Atugubah held that the termination of the contract was not based on breach of contract between 1999 and 2003, adding that losing one's rights forever.
He therefore upheld the bank's appeal.
The Fast Track High Court in Accra was on May 8, 2006 expected to decide whether or not the SG-SSB Bank Limited should begin paying money it allegedly owed CBAM Inc.