Pebco Belize Ltd v Carballo

• Judge: Shanks, J.
• Judgment Date: 15 March 2000
• Court: High Court (Belize)
• Docket Number: 473 of 1996
• Date: 15 March 2000

High Court

Shanks, J.

473 of 1996

Pebco Belize Limited

and

Carballo

Appearances:

Mr. Leo Bradley for the plaintiff.

Mr. Dylan Barrow for the defendant.

Contract - Agreement for distribution of soft drinks — Breach — Damages for breach — Defendant claimed that the plaintiff was only entitled to $7,282 since it had failed to pay $11,940 for the costs of repair and fuel for the vehicle provided under the agreement — Finding that the plaintiffs had given the defendants several credits in respect of sums owed leaving an outstanding balance of $7,622 — Finding that there was no agreement for the fuel or routine maintenance or repairs of the vehicle and so the counterclaim for $11,940 failed — Judgment for the plaintiffs.

Shanks, J.

1 This is a claim for $13,174.80 for the supply of soft drinks by Pebco to a distributor in the Orange Walk District, Mr. Carballo, in the period up to July 1994. The Defence states that only $7,282 is due and outstanding and counterclaims for a failure to pay agreed costs of $11,940 for repair and fuel costs for a van provided under the distribution agreement and for damages for premature termination of the distributorship.

2 Pebco called the company accountant Mr. Acosta to prove the debt of $13,174.80. He produced the accounts receivable ledger for Mr. Carballo which showed various charges and credits from 17 September, 1993 to 27 July, 1994 ending with a balance of $13,174.80. In the particulars of the claim set out in the writ, the sum of $13,174.80 was said to be made up of amounts due under seven specific invoices. Mr. Carballo produced receipts issued by Pebco in respect of two of those invoices, which, after credit is given in respect of them, leaves only $7,622. Mr. Bradley for Pebco sought leave at the end of the trial to amend the particulars of the claim so as simply to claim an amount due on a running account rather than by reference to specific invoices. Mr. Dylan Barrow for the defendant resisted this amendment on the basis that Mr. Carballo had pleaded his Defence and came to court ready to deal with certain specific invoices. Had he been warned that the claim arose on a running account he might have taken steps to check the whole account to see if he agreed with the final figure. I think Mr. Barrow is right to say that his client would therefore suffer irremediable prejudice if I were to allow an amendment and I therefore refuse Mr. Bradley's application. It...