Our appointment was not conducted on facts established by court ruling, Deloitte
Dram Oil accuses Deloitte of acting in negligence in commercial dispute
Dram Oil and Trading Limited, an oil trading firm is asking a Commercial Division of an Accra High Court to dismiss arguments filed in a case by auditing firm Deloitte and Touche.
According to Dram Oil, arguments filed by Deloitte is “fundamentally flawed, legally deficient and factually unmeritorious”
A JoyNews report explained the move comes after Dram Oil stated its resolve to recover more than 187,595,000 from Deloitte following allegations it acted in negligence in a commercial dispute which took place in 2013 between Dram Oil and Cal Bank.
The portal said documents in its possession show the dispute ended in court with the matter ruled in favour of Dram Oil.
Portions of the document, according to the report said the court in its ruling made consequential orders for the appointment of an audit firm to “audit the books, records and inventory of the 7th Defendant relating to the subject-matter suit, particularly with respect to payments, receivables, emergency cargo under recoveries received by 7th Defendant under the Tripartite Agreement.”
This resulted in Deloitte and Touche being tasked to conduct the audit back in May 2018 after an initial auditing firm could not complete the task.
Relevant facts in relation to the dispute and contained in the documents from the court proceedings were said to have been made available to Deloitte and Touche.
The allegation however resulted in Dram Oil accusing the report tendered in by the auditing firms as “irrelevant, misleading and egregiously defective fictions.”
“Defendant knew or ought to have known were not true or reliable since the Defendant had no reasonable basis to believe same to be true or reliable, all of which were wrongful and constitutes professional negligence,” the company noted.
The oil trading firm is now arguing that Deloitte’s findings and conclusion on the matter were established contrary to facts presented in Court in its favour. The firm said, based on this, it decided to take legal action against the auditing firm.
Meanwhile, documents filed by Deloitte argue that its appointment as an auditing firm was not conducted on the basis of any facts established in a court judgement.
But the oil trading company disagrees and therefore wants the Court to dismiss the position taken by Deloitte and Touche. Dram Oil however disagrees and wants the court to dismiss this position taken by the audit firm.
See the document of reply and defence to counterclaim in the matter of Dram Oil vs Deloitte and Touche
MA/ DA
File photo