Sic Insurance Company Ltd Vrs Ivory Finance Company Ltd and Others [2018] GHASC 12 (21 February 2018)

Sic Insurance Company Ltd Vrs Ivory Finance Company Ltd and Others [2018] GHASC 12 (21 February 2018)

The Supreme Court held that where fraud is pleaded as a ground to set aside a consent judgment, the matter must proceed to trial on the merits and cannot be summarily dismissed. The lower courts erred in treating the action as res judicata and in failing to investigate the allegations of fraud by evidence.

Citation
[2018] GHASC 12
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/appellant: SIC Insurance Company Ltd.; Defendant/respondent/respondent: Ivory Finance Company Ltd.; Defendant/respondent/respondent: Doris Awo Nkani; Defendant/respondent/respondent: Italconstruct International Ltd.; Defendant/respondent/respondent: Kwesi Baidoo; Defendant/respondent/respondent: James Kwegyir Aggrey
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
21 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Court of Appeal to Supreme Court
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Consent Judgment, Fraud in Civil Proceedings, Summary Dismissal, Natural Justice, Estoppel
Source Language
English
Company Law Civil Procedure Setting Aside Consent Judgment Fraud in Civil Proceedings Summary Dismissal Natural Justice Estoppel

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SIC Insurance Company Ltd.

Plaintiff/appellant/appellant

Ivory Finance Company Ltd.

Defendant/respondent/respondent

Doris Awo Nkani

Defendant/respondent/respondent

Italconstruct International Ltd.

Defendant/respondent/respondent

Kwesi Baidoo

Defendant/respondent/respondent

James Kwegyir Aggrey

Defendant/respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Court of Appeal to Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lower courts erred in summarily dismissing the action where fraud was pleaded
  2. 2 Whether a consent judgment can be set aside on grounds of fraud
  3. 3 Whether the Court of Appeal erred in raising and determining estoppel without hearing the appellant

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that where fraud is pleaded as a ground to set aside a consent judgment, the matter must proceed to trial on the merits and cannot be summarily dismissed. The lower courts erred in treating the action as res judicata and in failing to investigate the allegations of fraud by evidence.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgments of the High Court and Court of Appeal set aside
  • Order for trial on the merits based on the pleadings as they stood at the High Court