<<Print>>

An Accra-based businesswoman and estate developer, Adjoa Agyekum, has sued an Ivorian lawyer, Keli Nathalie, who had been transacting business with her company. Also joined in the suit are The Spectator, a state-owned weekly newspaper and two others. The newspaper, together with its editor Tina Aforo Yeboah, is being sued for libel, over a news item it published in the March 1-7, 2014 edition headlined: �Estate Developer Dupes Lawyer.� Madam Adjoa Agyekum, Managing Director of Martinas Properties Limited, is seeking GH�100,000 as damages from The Spectator for denting her image, and an order that the newspaper should publish a retraction in two editions. Furthermore, the plaintiff wants an order for damages for forced entry by the Ivorian defendant, Ms Nathalie and her family, and wants the court to assess it at GH�25,000.00. The plaintiff wants an order restraining Ms Nathalie from holding herself as the legal owner of the property located opposite Trassaco Phase Two Gate, Plot 2 in Accra. She also wants a declaration that the house type in issue is one of the plaintiff�s properties � Martinas Properties Limited. According to Ms Agyekum, the Ivorian lawyer was still left with $25,350 and GH�8600 to pay for the property before indicating her disinterest in the plush house, saying that she was returning to La Cote d�Ivoire. In her statement of claim, the plaintiff averred that the property in issue is a six-bedroom house she described as �prestigious gold type house�. She claimed that when the house was about to be completed for delivery to Ms. Nathalie, she (Ms. Nathalie) indicated her disinterest upon the instruction that she was relocating to Ivory Coast. �She further instructed the plaintiff to offer the house for sale and pay back sums advanced into a detailed account with a local bank. The amount paid towards the house was $370,000,� the plaintiff claimed. The plaintiff said the house was subsequently offered for sale to another prospective buyer with changes carried out in the kitchen and an amount of �12,000 was invested by the new buyer, adding that all changes and offers for purchase were brought to the knowledge of Ms Nathalie. According to the plaintiff, she received a letter from a law firm who were solicitors of Ms. Nathalie and she (plaintiff) wrote back to explain the circumstances to them. The plaintiff said the issue was subsequently reported to the police by the defendant and as if that was not enough, The Spectator published that she had duped the Ivorian. As a result, the plaintiff said she was �distracted and disappointed� and claimed jointly and severally against the defendants. Checks at the court�s registry indicated that defendants were yet to file their responses.