Nov 29, 2011, 11:57 AM
One Ebeauzar Paisey Armoh, Corporate Service Manager at Gambega, was on 8 August 2011 taken to task by way of cross-examination by Amadou Wuri Jallow, the defendant, who has been dragged to the Kanifing Magistrates’ Court by Gambega.
Mr Armoh earlier testified in court in favour of Gambega against the defendant.
Amadou Wuri Jallow asked the witness whether the defendant’s business used to give empties (forms) back when Gambega staff would deliver to him in his store.
The witness responded that if they had empties, they would take them and record them.
The defendant put it to the witness that what was signed by Gambega’s agents in the empties was not the amount that was posted in his account. The witness confirmed that was the case.
“The invoices for 16 December 2009, you claimed before the court, did they accrue while you were at Gambega?” the defendant asked.
“Yes, I was there at that time,” the witness answered.
The defendant asked the witness whether he could explain to the court the contract breach of which the company was claiming.
In response, the witness told the court there was an implied exclusivity contract between Gambega and Baby Wholesale (the defendant’s business’s name).
“Could you show that exclusivity between us?” the defendant enquired.
“I said there is an implied exclusivity contract and that is why you enjoy the pricing for that category,” the witness replied.
“Tell me what price I am enjoying,” said the defendant.
The witness stated in response that the company used to sell to the defendant at D170.50 and the price to offer their clients was D190, stating further that it was in the invoices.
“You said I was enjoying the price at D170.50, tell me the length of time,” the defendant challenged.
“I can’t give specific dates unless I go and check the documents, and if I am given time, I will give you specific dates,” replied the witness.
“We decide to give whatever pricing to whatever category of customers,” the witness declared.
“Could you tell the court what credit facility you provided me?” the defendant wanted to know.
“You are buying now and paying later. That is credit facility,” said the witness.
“I put it to you that there was no credit facility you provided me,” the defendant challenged.
But the witness maintained that the defendant had credit facility with Gambega.
The case was then adjourned till 10 August 2011.