[2017]DLHC3837 • March 15, 2017 • High Court
PROF. AGYEMAN BADU AKORSAH & 3 ORS vs. MINISTER FOR JUSTICE& ATTORNEY-GENERAL & 2 ORS
The Plaintiffs/Applicants sought to join the Millennium Development Authority (MiDA) as a fourth Defendant in an ongoing suit against the Minister for Justice & Attorney-General and others. The Plaintiffs argued that MiDA should be joined to ensure that decisions of the Court would be binding on MiDA and to avoid multiplicity of suits. The Defendants opposed the application, contending that MiDA, as a government agency and agent of the Government of Ghana (GOG), would be bound by the Court's decisions affecting the GOG even if not joined as a party.
read moreThe Plaintiffs/Applicants seek to join the Millennium Development Authority (MiDA) to the present suit with the filing of this application on 20th June 2016. The Defendants/Respondents vehemently oppose the application. At paragraph 10 of the Affidavit in Support of the application, the Plaintiffs per their solicitor deposed “[t]hat the object of this application is to join MiDA to this suit as a 4th Defendant so that decisions of this Court would be binding on MiDA as well and to avoid a multiplicity of suit.” This, indeed, is the thrust of the present application. Accordingly, I discount the lame attempt by learned counsel for the Plaintiffs in his written submissions to give the alleged ignorance of the legal status of MiDA as the main reason for their non-joinder of MiDA to the suit from the outset. In fact, at paragraph 10 of the Statement of Claim, the Plaintiffs pleaded that the Government of the Republic of Ghana (GOG) appointed MiDA to lead the privatization process...