Bank of Sierra Leone v Yada Williams & Associates (CIV APP 24/2024) [2026] SLCA 1 (1 June 2026)

CIV.APP. NO.24 / 2024 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF SIERRA LEONE . AN BETWEEN: Xs Qa Y S BANK OF SIERRA LEONE GAMSCARPELLANT sop i

AND is

YADA WILLIAMS & ASSOCIATES - ~—- RESPONDENT

Coram

Hon. Mrs. Justice F. B. Alhadi JSC - Presiding Hon. Mr. Justice R. Fynn JA

Hon. Mrs. Justice T. Bamett JA

Counsel: = P. Lambert Esq = For the Appellant

C. 1, Pateh Bah Esq

Y. Williams Esq - For the Respondents J. Noldred Ms.

B. Kutubu Esq Judgment of the Court of Appeal dated 4" June 2026 in the case of Bank of Sierra Leone and 1 Yada Williams and Associates.

JUDGMENT DELIVERED THIS __DAY OF JUNE 2026. ALHADI JSC: On the 18" of March 2024 a Notice of Appeal was filed by the Appellant against the Judgment of the Learned Trial Judge (LTJ), Hon. Mr. Justice M. Bawoh, J. dated the 14" day of February 2024 on the following

Grounds

3 (I) The Leamed Trial Judge misdirected himself and erred in law and fact and came to an erroneous decision when he held in his Judgment that the Respondent's claim for retainership is from the 1% of June 2018. The Learned Trial Judge failed to give any or any proper consideration to the fact although the Respondent claimed that the agreement with the Governor was for a retainership commencing in July 2018 to July 2019, but the Respondent made the following submission at paragraph 12.2 at page 8 of their written address to the Court as follows:

“PW1 during cross-examination by counsel for the Defendant testified that the Plaintiff's case was based on the reiainer agreement of the 1* November 2016 and the draft retainer agreement that was forwarded to the Plaintiff by the Defendant following the visit of the Governor of the Defendant's establishment on the 17" July 2018 in which he offered a year's contract to the Plaintiff which was there and then accepted. The Plaintiff concedes that the retainer agreement of 1% November 2016 contains an arbitration clause, and that this court is not the proper forum to deal with matters emanating from the said retainer agreement. The Plaintiff therefore abandons its claim for fees for the period 1* June 2018 to 16 July 2018.”

Judgment of the Court of Appeal dated 4" June 2026 in the case of Bank of Sierra Leone and 2 ‘Yada Williams and Associates.

PARTICULARS OF MISDIRECTION AND ERRORS OF LAW

“The simple question before the court is whether the ‘Arrangements’ between the Plaintiff and the Defendant and their actions thereof from the 1% June 2018 to 4" June 2019 amounted to a valid contract; thereby entitling the Plaintiff herein to recover the sum as in his claims before this court.”

“An additional question, a side comment worthy of consideration is whether the Plaintiffs were put in a position objective wise to believe that the retainership from 1 June 2018 effected and thus executed purposely so referred to as a valid contract.”

(ll) That the Learned Trial Judge erred in fact and law when he failed to give consideration to issue of whether the court was the property forum for this matter as the Respondent obviously states in it address at paragraph 12.2 as follows:

“The Plaintiff concedes that the retainer agreement of the 1% November 2016 contains an arbitration clause, and this court could therefore not be the proper forum to deal with matters emanating from the said retainership agreement.”

(Ill) That the Learned Trial Judge erred in law and in fact in that he failed to give any or any proper consideration to the fact that the Respondent had, in arbitration proceedings (which were instituted by the Respondent, claimed to be entitled to retainer fees which are the subject matter of the action in the High Court) claimed to

Judgment of the Court of Appeal dated 4" June 2026 in the case of Bank of Sierra Leone and 3 Yada Williams and Associates.

be at all time entitled to the said retainership fees under the terms ‘of the 2016 Retainership agreement signed between the Appellant and the Respondent, but in the proceedings before the Court the Respondent claimed that the claim for retainer fees was brought under the unsigned 2018 retainer agreement which was sent to the Respondent by the Appellant to the Respondent in July 2018. These clear contradicting evidence and submissions of the Respondent to the Arbitrator and the Court were not explained not addressed by the Respondent in its evidence and address to the Court. It was likewise completely ignored by the Learned Trial Judge in his Judgment which led to an erroneous finding that there was in fact and law a contract between the Appellant and the Respondent pursuant to the unsigned 2018 retainership agreement.

(IV) That the Learned Trial Judge erred in law and fact when he found that following the meeting between the then Governor of the Appellant and the Respondent held at the Respondent's offices there was a valid contract between the Appellant and the Respondent and opined and found that-

“It is clear to this court that an agreement alone does not constitute 2 contract. Also, it is clear to this court that a written contract must be signed by both parties to be legally enforceable but however, some do not require signatures or could be considered to be conclusive of their respective...” Judgment of the Court of Appeal dated 4" June 2026 in the case of Bank of Sierra Leone and 4 Yada Wiliams and Associates.

The pages read for this report end here. The judgment continues in the PDF.