A former Justice of the Supreme Court docket, Professor Justice Samuel Day-Bah, who was appointed by the Professional Division of the Accra Substantial Courtroom to arbitrate in the case of the defuntct uniBank, has penned to the functions included in the issue to surface just before him on Wednesday, June 19, 2019.
The look of the 16 shareholders, the receiver of the financial institution, Nii Amanor Dodoo, and the Attorney-Normal will allow Prof. Justice Day-Bah, as the sole arbitrator, to decide whether or not or not the revocation of uniBank’s class-one particular banking licence by the Financial institution of Ghana (Bog) was accomplished in accordance with the tenets of legislation.
The Accra Significant Court, presided more than by Justice Jenifer Dadzie, referred the matters contained in a counter-declare filed by lawyers for Dr Kwabena Duffour II, one particular of the 16 shareholders of the financial institution, for arbitration.
The counter-assert argued that the revocation of uniBank’s licence was unlawful.
The courtroom, pursuant to provisions of Act 930, referred the make a difference of the revocation to arbitration and appointed Prof. Justice Date-Bah as the sole arbitrator on May perhaps 17, 2019.
Background of scenario
The court indicated that its final decision to appoint an arbitrator did not, on the other hand, stop it from adjudicating on the other counter-promises, and that the presiding decide would hear other reliefs in the counter-claims that did not tumble under the ambit of Act 930.
It was the regarded see of the courtroom that not all the reliefs in the counter-claim instantly challenged the revocation of uniBank’s licence and the appointment of the receiver.
The reliefs involved a declaration that the receiver did not have the proper to “interfere with the sanctity of any agreement or transaction entered into among uniBank and any of its buyers or shareholders”.
Yet another aid is an order for common, punitive and exemplary damages.
The ruling by the courtroom was as a consequence of an application submitted by the receiver urging the courtroom to dismiss the total counter-declare by the shareholders.
Legal professionals for the applicant argued that the counter-statements have been an endeavor by the shareholders to delay the hearing of a fit filed by the receiver against them and that the shareholders understood that the good forum for their motion was arbitration.
Justice Dadzie, nevertheless, rejected the argument that all the reliefs in the counter-assert ought to be established by arbitration.
“I reject the assertion of the applicant that because a higher part of the pleadings and counter-assert of the respondents challenged the appointment of the receiver or the actions of the Bog, the total counter-assert of the respondent need to be struck out,” she held
Match and counter-declare
On September 4, 2018, the receiver of uniBank sued the 16 shareholders for allegedly breaching their fiduciary duties as directors of the financial institution and, in the approach, generating the financial institution incur a GH¢5.7 billion personal debt, foremost to its collapse.
The plaintiff, appropriately, prayed the High Courtroom to hold the 16 defendants jointly liable for all the loss uniBank Ghana Confined had suffered.
The shareholders involve Dr Kwabena Duffuor, HODA Holdings Ltd, HODA Attributes Ltd, Built-in Homes Ltd, Alban Logistics Ltd, Starlife Assurance, Bolton Portfolio Ltd and Dr Kwabena Duffuor II.
The rest are Opoku Gyamfi Boateng, Prof. Newman Kwadwo-Kusi, Owusu Ansah Awere, Ekow Nyarko Dadzie-Dennis, Boatemaa Kakra Duffour-Nyarko, Kofi Kyereh Darkwah, Nana Boakye Asafu-Adjaye and Alex Gaddiel Buabeng.
The defendants denied all the allegations, and on October 12, 2018 3 of them filed a counter-declare accusing the plaintiff of specific infractions and, thus, searching for certain reliefs.
Dr Duffuor II, Prof. Kwadwo-Kusi and Ms Duffuor-Nyarko, in the counter-claim, accused Nii Dodoo of issuing a defective report, major to the collapse of the financial institution.