Joana Quaye, former wife of famous Ghanaian businessman and philanthropist Richard Nii Armah Quaye, widely known as RNAQ, has reportedly filed a fresh suit in their ongoing divorce settlement battle.
According to a report by thelawplatform.online, Joana Quaye, in her new writ, which was filed at the Commercial Division of the High Court in Accra, is seeking 10% of the profits of Bills Micro Credit Limited, a company that records show they co-founded, since its founding in December 2011.
The report indicated that Joana Quaye’s request forms part of her rights as a result of her directorship, investments, and ownership of Bills Micro Credit Limited.
She argued through her lawyers that she owns 10% of the company and thus is entitled to 10% of its profits under the ownership agreement.
“The Plaintiff thus seeks declarative reliefs from the commercial court that she holds 10% shares of the 3rd Defendant, Bills Micro Credit Limited and thus, entitled to 10% of profits of the company.
“She further seeks the court to order her ex-husband and Bills Micro Credit, the crown jewel of the successes of Mr. Quaye, to account to her for all profits made since December 2011. She further seeks orders directed at RNAQ and Bills Micro Credit for the payment of her share of the profits, with interest at the prevailing bank rate,” part of the report read.
The ex-wife of RNAQ told the court that she never transferred her shares in the company, as asserted by her former husband.
She thus accused RNAQ of fraudulently transferring her shares in the company.
“a. It is not in doubt that the plaintiff was the owner of 100,000 shares (10%) of the shares in Quick Credit and Investment Moneylending Company Limited.
b. The plaintiff has never agreed to a transfer of her shares to anybody.
Neither has she received any consideration for the purported transfer.
c. The 1st defendant executed a transfer of the plaintiff’s shares through an instrument which was not the act or deed of the plaintiff.
d. The plaintiff has never signed any instrument or document transferring her shares to anybody, including the 2nd defendant.
e. The 1st defendant, without any lawful authorisation by the plaintiff or excuse, made an instrument by which he assigned the shares of the plaintiff to the 2nd defendant.
f. The purported transfer of the plaintiff’s shares was neither pursuant to any resolution stipulated by the Companies Act of Ghana nor in fulfilment of any of the requirements of Ghanaian law.
g. The purported alteration of the records of the company through the unlawful transfer of her shares and the unlawful entry of the 2nd defendant as a shareholder occurred as a result of a fake deed of transfer made by the 1st defendant and the falsification of the plaintiff’s signature,” a portion of the writ states.
Source: Ghanaweb