|
(LOUIS
LESLIE
( |
PLAINTIFF |
BETWEEN |
(AND
( |
|
|
(FEMAGRA
INDUSTRIES LIMITED
(LILIANA MOLINA |
DEFENDANTS
|
Supreme
Court
Action No. 373 of 1998
6th April, 2000
Shanks, J.
Pitts
& Elrington for the Plaintiff
Barrow & Williams for the Defendant
Contract
for the supply of goods - Claim on outstanding invoice balance
- Defendants liable to pay balance.
J
U D G M E N T
-
This
is a claim for $27,056.40 said to be outstanding on Invoice
No. 12796 dated 16th November, 1995 for a total of $31,243
for goods sold and delivered by the Plaintiff to the Defendants.
It is essentially a debt collecting and accounting exercise.
-
The
Plaintiff produced a copy of his ledger and an original
white copy of the invoice in question and gave evidence
that the only payments made by the Defendants towards
the invoice were some small amounts noted in the invoice
which leaves $27,056.40 over. In the absence of other
evidence, I would have had no hesitation in accepting
that what the Plaintiff told me was true and accurate.
- The
second Defendant produced what appeared to be copy receipts
produced from her own book of payment vouchers. These were
accepted as having been signed by the Plaintiff's driver.
They showed the following payments against the words "Pago
de Pactura #12796".
18
November 1995 |
$
5,310.00
|
25
November 1995 (cash) |
6,500.00
|
04
December 1995 |
6,500.00
|
11
December 1995 |
6,500.00
_________
|
|
|
T
O T A L |
24,810.00
_________
|
There
was also a form of receipt signed by the Plaintiff himself
dated 28th December, 1995 relating to a cheque made out to
the Defendant's daughter which stated, "Reposition de
cheque con valor de $6,500.00 a favor de Louis Leslie".
The Defendant said this represented a further payment of $6,500.00.
I am not sure exactly what the Spanish words signify, but
I am entirely satisfied by the Plaintiff's evidence that the
payment represented a replacement for one of the other $6,500.00
payments mentioned above because the cheque in question had
been dishonoured. The Plaintiff's case was that the $24,810.00
paid did not relate to invoice # 12796, but to the preceding
delivery of goods worth $24,750.00 with $60.00 in respect
of bank charges. Although the ledger records a receipt for
this amount dated 16th November, 1996, I am satisfied that
the cheque for $24,810.00 representing that payment was also
dishonoured and that these payments by the Defendant did indeed
relate to that earlier delivery. Although her payment voucher
documents say that the payments related to invoice #12796
they were only signed by the driver and they add up to precisely
the amount shown due on the ledger in respect of the earlier
delivery. It was also significant that the Defendant did not
have the white copy of the invoice #12796, which she agreed
the Plaintiff normally supplied to her once an invoice had
been paid in full.
4. I,
therefore, find that there is $27,056.00 outstanding and unpaid
on invoice #12796. There shall be judgment against both Defendants
for this sum with interest at 12% from the end of November
1995, (totaling $14,069) and costs to be taxed. The judgment
debt is to be paid in monthly installments of $1,500, the
first installments to be paid at the end of April, 2000.
----------OO----------
|