(1983) 1 CLR 298
[*298] 1983 May 3
[A. LOIZOU, DEMETRIADES, LORIS, JJ.]
AHMED KAWAL NASER EL DIN,
Appellant-Defendant.
v.
FEREOS LTD.
Respondents-Plaintiffs.
(Civil Appeal No. 6460).
Company Law-Sale of goods-Person with whom sellers, had transactions claiming to have taken delivery of the goods not in his personal capacity but in his capacity as director of a company- Existence of company not disclosed to sellers-Finding of trial Court that transaction took place between seller and such person in his personal capacity sustained.
Interest-Claim for balance due for goods sold and delivered-Whether interest could be claimed from date of each invoice.
The respondents sued the appellant for the sum of C£334.625 mils balance due for goods sold and delivered. The appellant by his defence alleged that he never himself purchased and took delivery of the goods from the respondents in his personal capacity but any dealings between the respondents and the appellant were made in the capacity of the latter as a director of the “Fedula Imports and Exports Co. Ltd.”, a company registered in Cyprus.
The relevant invoices for the supply of the goods in question were issued under various names but nowhere in these invoices the exact name of the above company was mentioned.
The trial Court rejected the above defence and gave judgment against the appellants for the amount claimed plus 9% interest from the date of each invoice. Hence this appeal.
Held, that since nowhere in the invoices the exact name of the company is mentioned it would have been contrary to any [*299] notion of company law if the trial Judge had found that the transactions in question took place between the respondents and the said company whose existence does not appear from the evidence to have ever been disclosed to the respondents accordingly the judgment of the trial Judge will be upheld but the appeal will be allowed partly by canceling that part of the judgment that adjudges the appellant to pay 9% interest on said invoices because interest could not be claimed.
Appeal partly allowed.
Appeal.
Appeal by defendant against the judgment of the District Court of Nicosia (Stavrinides, D.J.) dated the 31st May, 1952 (Action No. 1050/Si) whereby he was adjudged to pay to plaintiff the sum of. C£344.625 mils balance for goods sold and delivered.
C. Gavrielides, for the appellant.
C. Emilianides, for the respondent.
A. LOIZOU J. gave the following judgment of the Court. The respondents, a commercial company registered under (lie law with limited liability, filed an action against the appellant for the sum of C£344.625 mils balance due for goods sold and delivered.
The appellant, by his defence, alleged that he never himself purchased and took delivery from the respondents these goods in his personal capacity, “but any dealings between the plaintiffs and the defendant were made in the capacity of the appellant as a Director of the Fedula Imports and Exports Co. Ltd.”, a company registered in Cyprus under the relevant laws.
The trial Judge, after hearing the evidence adduced by both sides, dismissed this defence and found that the defendant now appellant had personally contracted with the plaintiffs and that he was liable to pay the balance for the goods supplied to him by the plaintiffs, plus 9% interest from the date of each invoice. With regard to this interest, adjudged to be paid, counsel for the respondents has conceded that it could not be claimed and the judgment appealed from could be modified accordingly.[*300] Counsel for the appellant has maintained that the trial Judge wrongly decided the case as being one of credibility inasmuch as the invoices which were produced by the respondents-plaintiffs were issued in various names, some as Ahmed Fedula, some as Ahmed Fedula Co., some as Kawal El Din: Ahmed, one as El Fedula and one, characteristically, as Kawal Ahmed Fedula. We said “characteristically” as none is in the name of Fedula imports & Exports Ltd., and the name “Fedula” and the other names used were clearly indicative of the identity of the purchaser, a foreigner in Cyprus, rather than as accurate description of the legal or physical person with which the respondents were dealing and to whom they were supplying their goods on credit.
We uphold on this point the judgment of the learned trial Judge and his findings and conclusions that the appellant was purchasing the goods in his personal capacity and not a Director of the aforesaid registered company. In fact, as already seen, nowhere in these invoices, to which the attention of this Court has been drawn by learned counsel for the appellant and which, formed the foundation upon which he has based his agreements, the exact name of the said company, that is, Fedula imports & Exports Co. Ltd., is mentioned and it would have been contrary to any notion of company law if the learned trial Judge had found that the transactions in question took place between the respondent company and the said company whose existence does not appear from the evidence to have ever been disclosed to the respondents.
We uphold, therefore, the judgment of the learned trial Judge but the appeal is allowed partly by cancelling that part of the judgment that adjudges the appellant to pay 9% interest on the said invoices. The appeal, therefore, is dismissed partly and partly allowed as above. In the circumstances, the appellant to pay two thirds of the costs of this appeal.
Appeal partly allowed. Order for costs as above.
cylaw.org: Από το ΚΙΝOΠ/CyLii για τον Παγκύπριο Δικηγορικό Σύλλογο