BY Issah Olegor
The High Court’s Commercial Division has entered summary judgment against financial technology company Zeepay Ghana Limited and its Chief Executive Officer, Andre Takyi-Appiah, ordering them to pay more than US$11.6 million, €8,500 and GH¢1.4 million to a customer after finding that they failed to transfer funds deposited with them for onward payment to designated beneficiaries.
The judgment, delivered by Justice Afi Agbanu Kudomor, followed an application for summary judgment filed by businessman Michael Yusuf, who argued that the defendants had no valid defence to his claims after allegedly failing to transfer the funds entrusted to them.
In its ruling, the Commercial Court held that the evidence presented by the plaintiff overwhelmingly established that substantial sums of money had been deposited with Zeepay and into the personal mobile money wallet of the company’s Chief Executive Officer for onward transfers to persons nominated by the plaintiff.
The Court noted that after examining the evidence of deposits, correspondence exchanged between the plaintiff and officials of Zeepay, as well as the course of dealings between the parties, it found no reasonable defence capable of warranting a full trial.
According to the Court, Zeepay and its Chief Executive “have not been able to raise a reasonable defence to the instant action to be allowed to contest Plaintiff Applicant’s claims against them on the merits.”
Based on that finding, the Court granted the plaintiff’s application for summary judgment under Order 14 Rule 12(c) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (C.I. 47), bringing the matter to a conclusion without proceeding to a full trial.
Under the judgment, the Court ordered Zeepay and Takyi-Appiah to jointly pay Michael Yusuf the sum of US$11,585,753, €8,500, and GH¢1,400,000.
The Court further directed that interest on all the sums should accrue from the date of judgment until the amounts are fully paid.
In addition to the monetary award, the Court awarded costs of GH¢500,000 in favour of the plaintiff.
The plaintiff’s application was argued by Alfred Paapa Darkwah, while Zeepay and its Chief Executive were represented by O.K. Osafo-Buabeng, who sought to persuade the Court to remove Takyi-Appiah from the proceedings on the grounds that he should not be held personally liable.
However, the Court rejected that argument. Justice Kudomor held that the evidence before the Court showed that a significant portion of the disputed funds had been transferred directly into the personal mobile money account of the second defendant, Andre Takyi-Appiah.
The Court referred specifically to documentary exhibits tendered by the plaintiff, including account statements of the plaintiff’s merchants, which indicated that large sums had been deposited directly into the CEO’s personal mobile money wallet.
“Per the affidavit evidence, a substantial amount of the monies paid to the Defendants were paid directly to the personal mobile money account of the second Defendant Respondent,” the Court stated.
It therefore concluded that Mr. Takyi-Appiah was properly joined as a defendant in the action and could not be removed from the suit as requested by the defence.
“The Court is of the opinion that the second Defendant Respondent is therefore a proper party to the instant action,” the ruling added.
The case, reported as Michael Yusuf v. Zeepay Ghana Ltd & Another (TLP-HC-2026-17), centred on allegations that the plaintiff deposited substantial sums with Zeepay and the company’s Chief Executive for onward transfers to designated recipients but that the transfers were not completed as agreed.
After reviewing the evidence presented, including documentary records and correspondence exchanged between the parties, the Court determined that the plaintiff had established a clear entitlement to the monies claimed and that the defendants had failed to raise any triable issues requiring a full hearing.
