Mohamed Bangura v Dalian Shengai Ocean Fishing Co And 2 Others (SC CIV APP 1 of 2018) [2019] SLSC 3 (29 November 2019)

“ Zo sf SC. CIV. APP 1/2018 BETWEEN: = MOHAMED BANGURA. - APPELLANT AND DALIAN SHENGAI OCEAN FISHING CO - I" RESPONDENT ABIE ARUNA KOROMA - 2 RESPONDENT MONZA FISHING COMPANY -3 RESPONDENT

Coram

i HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE E. E. ROBERTS: : JSC HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. THOMPSON : JSC HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.B. HALLOWAY Jsc HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. $. KOROMA - Jsc HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE E.TAYLOR-CAMARA = JA

‘Mr. E.T. Koroma for the Appellant ‘ Mr. Umaru Napoleon Koroma for the I* Respondent Mr. Africanus Sesay and Ms. Sadia Bakarr for the 2™ and 3 Respondents

ee JUDGMENT OF THE HON. MR. JUSTICE E. E ROBERTS, JSC i Datiered on the [av of November, 2019 + The Appellant Mohamed Bangura is a fisherman who has been engaged in the fishing business for over 25 years. According to him, sometime in November 2013 he ‘was approached by his friend one Michael Wang also known as Yang Wang ( who told him that his Chinese business counterparts were interested in engaging in fishing in Sierra Leone and were looking for a Sierra Leonean with the requisite knowledge of the fishing industry). Michael Wang then introduced him to one David Wei who claimed to be a representative of Dalian Shenghai Ocean Fishing Company (1* Respondent). Acting as Representative of the I** Respondent Company, Mr. Wang and David Wei i commenced business discussions leading to the appointment of the Appellant as the sole agent ofthe 1* Respondent Company in Sierra Leone. They informed the Appellant that the 1* Respondent Company had applied for a loan from the Government of China for the construction of 10 (ten) fishing vessels and that as a condition for the granting of the Joan the 1% Respondent ‘Company was required to show some assurance that it will obtain ‘the necessary clearance and licences from the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources and that storage facilities were readily available. ‘They then requested the Appellant to go in search of a company or individual with the requisite fishing storage facility so as to facilitate the grant of the loan to the 1* i Respondent Company. The Appellant further alleges that it was orally agreed that once the loan was approved the 1* Respondent Company would bring the said vessels to Sierra Leone, commence fishing and the catch and proceeds would be shared as agreed by the parties, The Appellant carried out his own side of the agreement by securing storage facilities as Well as initiating contact with the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources. The storage facilities that the Appellant secured later became unavailable and as result he ~ contacted a friend to discuss possible alternative facilities. It was then that he met the 2"

i

4 : Respondent (Abie Aruna Koroma) who was residing in the same house as this friend at Goderich. The 2 Respondent got involved in the discussion during which the Appellant

x told her that he was the sole agent of the 1* Respondent. The 2™ Respondent told him that she operated a fishing business and would be able to secure a fishing storage facility and for this she demanded 25% shares of the company to be incorporated in Sierra Leone by the Appellant and the 1 Respondent. The Appellant agreed and the documents were prepared for the incorporation of the company. Subsequently she failed to sign them but instead proceeded to enter into an agreement directly with the 1* Respondent after inducing the 1** Respondent to breach ‘their agreement with the Appellant.

i By Writ of Summons dated 23" July, 2015, the Appellant brought an action in the High Court against the 1", 2 and 3 Respondents praying for, among other things, damages for breach of contract, specific performance and damages for inducing a breach of contract.

‘The Respondents filed their defence denying the Appellant's claims and the matter proceeded to trial. At the end of the trial the Appellant’s case was successful and by judgment delivered on the 13 February, 2017, the High Court granted the following

Orders

1. Against the 1*, 2" and 3" Defendants a declaration that the Plaintiff is the sole

i agent and promoter of the 1 Defendant in respect of all fishing activities in Sierra

Leone pursuant to oral agreement entered into between the Plaintiff and the 1*

‘Defendant in 2013.

2. An injunction restraining ‘the 1 Defendant whether by itself or its servants, agents

or privies from carrying out fishing activities in Sierra Leone with the 2" and 3"

Defendants to the {exclusion] of the Plaintiff is refused accordingly.

3. An Injunction restraining the 2 and 3" Defendants from engaging in any fishing business and/or activities with the 1* Defendant whether by themselves, their *s servants, agents or privies is refused.

4. [order specific performance against the 1* Defendant of the oral agreement centered into between the Plaintiff and the 1** Defendant in the year 2013.

> 5, Against the 1* Defendant recovery of the sum of US$126,000.00 (One Hundred ‘an Twenty-Six Thousand Dollars) being promoter and agency fees incurred by the Plaintiff as agent and promoter of the I* Defendant for engaging into discussion and negotiations with the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources in Sierra Leone.

6. Torder the 2" and 3° Defendants to account for the proceeds of sale of frozen and

: other fish obtained during fishing activities in Sierra Leone with the 8 vessels referred to as Shengai 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 and 8.

7. The Plaintiff shall recover against the 2 and 3 Defendants the value of 26,000 cartoons of fish (6,000 of which weighed 25 kilograms and 20,600 of which weighed 20 kilograms) sold by the 2" and 3" Defendants in the local market of Sierra Leone between the period 14* July 2015 to 20% July 2015.

8. Against the 2" and 3rd Defendants recovery of the value of the total amount of cartoons of fish obtained from the fishing activities using the 1 Defendant's

. fishing vessel referred to above until payment.

9. Against the 2 defendant damages for inducing a breach of contract entered into between the Plaintiff and the 1* Defendant in the year 2013 assessed at US$120,000.00.

10.US$10,000.00 and US$20,000.00 as Special Damages is refused.

11 Interest is awarded on the said amount of US$126,000.00 pursuant to the Laws of Sierra Leone to be assessed.

12.Cost of the Plaintiff's Solicitors if not agreed to be taxed.

i ‘The Respondents were dissatisfied with the judgment of High Court and as a result filed a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeal. This Appeal was heard and after hearings the

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