Leslie v Femagra Industries Ltd et Al

• Jurisdiction: Belize
• Judge: Shanks, J.
• Judgment Date: 16 April 2000
• Court: High Court (Belize)
• Docket Number: 373 of 1998
• Date: 16 April 2000

High Court

Shanks, J.

373 of 1998

Leslie

and

Femagra Industries Limited et al

Appearances:

Pitts & Elrington for the plaintiff.

Barrow & Williams for the defendant.

Contract - Contract for the supply of goods — Claim on the outstanding invoice balance — Finding that in the absence of other evidence the defendant was liable for the amount claimed.

Shanks, J.

1 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.

2 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.

3 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.”

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 plaintiffs 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...