How a 2008 CAL Bank Share Deal Became Ecobank’s Longest Court Battle
- Why Supreme Court Threw Out Ecobank’s Latest Challenge in Daniel Ofori Interest Dispute
The Supreme Court’s decision to dismiss Ecobank Ghana’s latest attempt to challenge the computation of interest in its long-running dispute with businessman Daniel Ofori has returned one of Ghana’s most consequential commercial litigation battles to the centre of public attention.
At the heart of the case is a transaction dating back to May 2008, involving the sale of more than 14 million CAL Bank shares on the Ghana Stock Exchange. What should have been a capital market settlement became an 18-year legal battle over whether the seller, Mr Ofori, was entitled not only to the proceeds of the share transaction, but also to interest calculated on an investment sum linked to the deal.
The latest ruling, delivered by a five-member Supreme Court panel presided over by Justice Amadu Tanko, dismissed an application by Ecobank Ghana and the Ghana Stock Exchange seeking to set aside Mr Ofori’s entry of judgment filed on April 6, 2021. The Court held that Mr Ofori was entitled to 30% monthly compounded interest on an investment sum of GH¢6.16 million from June 2, 2008, to July 25, 2018, and thereafter simple interest at 13.34% until final payment. The Court also awarded GH¢50,000 in costs against the applicants.
The dispute began when businessman William Oppong-Bio instructed Databank Brokerage to purchase CAL Bank shares owned by Mr Ofori and others. According to earlier court records, Databank executed the trade on the floor of the Ghana Stock Exchange on May 27, 2008, involving about 14.13 million CAL Bank shares. Under exchange settlement rules, once a trade is settled, it becomes irrevocable by the parties.
The transaction appeared to have progressed normally. The shares were transferred into the buyer’s name in CAL Bank’s register of members, and Ecobank, acting as the buyer’s banker, made payment instruments available to Mr Ofori. But the process was disrupted after the Bank of Ghana wrote to the Ghana Stock Exchange requesting that the transaction be put on hold while it carried out investigations. The problem was timing: according to court records, the Exchange received the Bank of Ghana’s letter around 1:00pm on May 30, 2008, but Databank received notice of the suspension only around 5:00pm, after payment had already been made.
Following media reports about the regulatory intervention, Ecobank stopped the banker’s drafts it had issued. That decision set off the litigation.
Mr Ofori went to court arguing that the shares had already been validly transferred and that he was entitled to the purchase price. The matter moved from the High Court to the Court of Appeal and eventually to the Supreme Court. Earlier summaries of the litigation indicate that both the High Court and Court of Appeal dismissed Mr Ofori’s case, before the Supreme Court upheld his appeal on July 25, 2018.
The legal fight did not end there. The next and most financially significant stage became the computation of interest.
Following further applications, the Supreme Court in 2019 and subsequent proceedings addressed the issue of interest payable on the investment amount. A 2021 review ruling recorded that the invested capital of GH¢6,162,240 was to attract interest at 30% compound interest from June 2, 2008, to the date of the Supreme Court judgment on July 25, 2018, and thereafter simple interest at the statutory rate of 13.34% until final payment.
Ecobank’s latest challenge focused on the mode of computing that interest particularly whether compounding should be monthly rather than annually. The Supreme Court’s latest ruling found that the evidence before the Court and applicable law supported Mr Ofori’s entitlement to monthly compounded interest over the relevant period.
Delivering the ruling, Justice Tanko said the principal question was whether Mr Ofori was entitled to compound interest calculated monthly rather than annually on the investment sum within the period under review. The Court concluded that he was.
“The effect is that the instant application fails in its entirety and we accordingly dismiss same,” the Court ruled, according to the Ghana News Agency report.
That is why the Supreme Court threw out Ecobank’s latest challenge. The Court was not reopening the entire share transaction dispute. It was dealing with the specific question of how interest on the investment sum should be computed. Having found that the earlier evidence and legal basis supported monthly compounding, the Court dismissed the application.
The decision has raised public attention because of the potential financial scale of the liability when monthly compound interest is applied over a decade-long period. The exact amount payable may still depend on final computation, previous payments, settlement status and any outstanding enforcement steps. But the case has already generated concern among customers and market watchers because Ecobank Ghana is one of the country’s major banks.
The matter also raises wider questions for Ghana’s financial markets. First, it highlights the importance of settlement finality in securities transactions. If a trade has been executed, shares transferred and payment instruments issued, any later regulatory intervention can create complex legal consequences. Second, it underlines the risk banks face when commercial disputes remain unresolved for long periods. Interest awards can become more financially significant than the original principal sum. Third, it raises governance lessons for brokers, banks, regulators and exchanges on how quickly market-sensitive directives must be communicated.
For Ecobank, the ruling has also become a reputational test. Public speculation after the ruling forced the bank to reassure customers about its financial position and operational stability.
In its public statement, Ecobank Ghana said it was aware of the recent court ruling in respect of claims against the bank and would continue to respect the judicial process. It said: “As a responsible financial institution, Ecobank Ghana PLC respects the judicial process and will continue to uphold the rule of law.”
The bank further stated that its financial position remained strong and resilient, adding that services were continuing without disruption. That reassurance may calm some immediate customer concerns. But the ruling is likely to keep the case in the public eye, especially because it involves a listed bank, a major capital market transaction, and a dispute that has travelled through Ghana’s judicial system for nearly two decades.
For readers trying to understand the case, the issue is not simply that Ecobank lost a court application. The deeper story is that a 2008 CAL Bank share transaction, interrupted by regulatory action after settlement had effectively progressed, created a chain of legal consequences that has now culminated in a Supreme Court ruling on monthly compound interest.
The Court’s latest decision does not begin the story. It is the latest chapter in a dispute about settlement, payment, investment proceeds and the cost of delay. For Ghana’s banking and capital markets, the lesson is clear: in financial transactions, uncertainty is expensive. And when litigation stretches over years, interest can become the real judgment.
