The plaintiff now the respondent/cross-appellant filed a Writ of Summons dated 5th of July, 1996 against the defendant now appellant-cross-respondent seeking a number of reliefs.

Respondent also pleaded facts in his statement of claim, facts in respect of his claim for loss of earnings and the payment of his solicitor’s fees.

The defendant reacted to the above claim by filling a statement of defence and counter-claim which amended two times over and was eventually titled further amended statement of defence and defendant’s amended counter-claim dated 12th day of August, 1997. He denied all the claims of the plaintiff apart from some paragraphs in response to which it averred that it placed the supply of goods paid for by the respondent and the payment of the freight charges due to the respondent on hold pending the determination at the Chief Magistrate’s Court of the criminal charges of conspiracy, forgery, receiving and subsequently selling off of the appellant’s property; and also pending the determination of the appellant’s counter-claim in the suit for conversion.

The trial court granted the declaratory reliefs sought by the respondent ordering the delivery of the goods paid for by the respondent. It also granted in part, the respondent’s claim for payment of freight charges, the release of his vehicles and damages for non-delivery of the goods paid for by the respondent. It dismissed the respondent’s claim for loss earnings arising from the detention of his solicitor’s fees on the ground that the remedy open to the respondent for detention of his vehicles was only the value of the vehicles and that his claim for his solicitor’s fees was too remote.

The trial court also dismissed the appellant’s counter-claim in its entity.

Both parties were dissatisfied with the judgement of the trial court and they both filed an appeal and a cross-appeal respectively.