Dalex Finance and Leasing Company Ltd Vrs Amanor& Anor [2022] GHASC 109 (14 April 2022)

Dalex Finance and Leasing Company Ltd Vrs Amanor& Anor [2022] GHASC 109 (14 April 2022)

The 3rd defendant is not vicariously liable for the fraudulent acts of its finance manager because those acts were committed outside the scope of his employment and in furtherance of his own and third parties' interests, not the company's business. The Borrowers and Lenders Act, 2008 (Act 773) does not apply to the claim against the 3rd defendant, and the indoor management rule does not bind the company in these circumstances.

Citation
[2022] GHASC 109
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/appellant: Dalex Finance and Leasing Company Ltd.; 1st Defendant: Ebenezer Denzel Amanor; 2nd Defendant: L.G.G Company Limited; 3rd Defendant/respondent/respondent: Huawei Technologies (GH) SA Limited
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
14 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appeal Judgment in the Supreme Court
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Vicarious Liability, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Scope of Employment, Indoor Management Rule, Credit Agreements, Deceit, Corporate Liability
Source Language
English
Company Law Tort Law Contract Law Vicarious Liability Fraudulent Misrepresentation Scope of Employment Indoor Management Rule Credit Agreements +2 more

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 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dalex Finance and Leasing Company Ltd.

Plaintiff/appellant/appellant

Ebenezer Denzel Amanor

1st Defendant

L.G.G Company Limited

2nd Defendant

Huawei Technologies (GH) SA Limited

3rd Defendant/respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appeal Judgment in the Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a company is vicariously liable for fraudulent acts of its finance manager committed outside the scope of employment
  2. 2 Whether the Borrowers and Lenders Act, 2008 (Act 773) applies to the claim against the 3rd defendant
  3. 3 Whether the indoor management rule or ostensible authority binds the company for the acts of its finance manager in this context

Ratio Decidendi

The 3rd defendant is not vicariously liable for the fraudulent acts of its finance manager because those acts were committed outside the scope of his employment and in furtherance of his own and third parties' interests, not the company's business. The Borrowers and Lenders Act, 2008 (Act 773) does not apply to the claim against the 3rd defendant, and the indoor management rule does not bind the company in these circumstances.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed