BRIGHT K. KORKORYIE & 1 ANOR. vs. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL & 12 ORS.

The plaintiffs commenced an action against the Attorney-General and 12 others. In the course of the proceedings, the Attorney-General, as 1st defendant/applicant, applied under Order 4 rule 5(2)(a) of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules, 2004 (C.I. 47) to have its name struck out for misjoinder. The basis of the application was that under section 33 of the Ghana Health Service and Teaching Hospitals Act, 1996 (Act 525), Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital is a body corporate capable of suing and being sued in its own name, and that the plaintiffs’ statement of claim disclosed no cause of action against the Attorney-General. This appears from the ruling where the court states: “In its supporting affidavit, the 1st defendant stated that the Ghana Health Service and Teaching Hospitals Act, 1996 Act 525 provides in section 33 of the said Act that KorleBu Teaching Hospital is a corporate entity with the power to sue and be sued in its corporate name...”

RULING ON APPLICATION ON NOTICE FOR MISJOINDER Ruling It is provided by Order 4 rule 5 sub rule 2(a) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (C.I. 47) as follows:- “At any stage of proceedings the Court may on such terms as it thinks just either of its own motion or on application order any person who has been improperly or unnecessarily made a party or who for any reason is no longer a party or a necessary party to cease to be a party”. It is under this rule that the first defendant/applicant has brought the present application for an order to strike out its name as a party to this suit. In its supporting affidavit, the 1st defendant stated that the Ghana Health Service and Teaching Hospitals Act, 1996 (Act 525) provides in section 33 of the said Act that Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital is a corporate entity with the power to sue and be sued in its corporate name and therefore the 1st defendant/applicant is not a necessary party to the present suit and so its name should be...