JUDGMENT
1.0 INTRODUCTION:
The Plaintiff caused to sue out the present writ against the Defendant through her lawful Attorney, Madam Mary Boitey, because for a long time, the Plaintiff has been domiciled in the USA.
1.1 The Plaintiff’s Statement of Claim was made up of 21 paragraphs only but in response to the Plaintiff’s Statement of Claim, the Defendant per her Amended Statement of Defence and Counterclaim filed as many as 57 paragraphs.
1.2 However, per her witness statement which eventually metamorphosed into her Evidence-In-Chief, the Defendant reduced her case to only 23 paragraphs, (see the Amended Witness Statement filed on 30th March, 2017).
1.3 The Plaintiff also added 34 paragraphs to her case by way of her Amended Reply and Defence to counterclaim.
1.4 The Plaintiff filed an Amended Witness Statement on 30th May, 2017 and followed it up with a supplementary witness statement. On 30th May, 2017, a exactly a year after filing her witness statement, the Plaintiff…