Daniel Ofori We act for Mr Daniel Ofori in respect of a suit against Ecobank Ghana Limited. Following a writ of fieri facias (fi-fa) which we caused to issue against the bank for its failure to pay the sum of GH₵96, 304,972.41 which the Supreme Court, has ordered them to pay Mr Ofori, based on the bank’s own admission at a hearing on 1st June 2021. After the pasting by a court bailiff of the fi-fa on the Head Office building of Ecobank on Friday, 26th November 2021, Ecobank issued a media release dated 26th November 2021 in which false and libellous allegations are made against Mr Ofori.
For, instance, it is simply not true that Mr Ofori tendered in evidence the investment agreement between Ecobank and himself at any stage in the case. The truth, as the court records and the judgment of the Supreme Court, dated 25th July 2018, confirm, is that Ecobank itself admitted that the agreed interest rate on the investment made by Mr Ofori with Ecobank was 30%. The judgment of the Supreme Court was therefore based on this admission.
Having regard to the fact that the Supreme Court judgment was based on Ecobank’s own admission, it clearly does not make sense to suggest that Mr Ofori has forged an investment agreement to prove his case against Ecobank. After the judgment of the Supreme Court, Ecobank surfaced with a document it described as the investment agreement in which was inserted the figure 15 as the percentage for interest on the investment. This was completely at variance with the 30% Ecobank had itself admitted to. It is Ecobank which has an interest in contradicting its earlier admission by seeking belatedly to introduce a document in which an interest rate of 15% is being put forward three years after the judgment of the Supreme Court and even after the failure of the application for review in March 2021.
In opposing the application for review, we drew the Supreme Court’s attention to the fact that the document Ecobank was now relying on lacked credibility, bearing on its face several handwritten alterations, and having issues with dating. The Supreme Court, by a unanimous decision, refused to review its decision on the ground urged by Ecobank that it had now discovered the investment agreement. The Court also refused to order the Police to conduct the forensic examination of the document Ecobank is […]
