SIGNAL OIL AND GAS CO. AND ANOTHER vs. BRISTOW HELICOPTERS LTD. AND ANOTHER [1969]DLHC443

Date	1969-07-14
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1969]DLHC443

GRIFFITHS-RANDOLPH J.

R. BANNERMAN (WITH HIM MISS SACKEY) FOR THE PLAINTIFFS.

PETER SWANIKER FOR THE FIRST DEFENDANTS.

ARCHIE CASELY-HAYFORD FOR THE SECOND DEFENDANTS.

[1969]DLHC443
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" >SIGNAL OIL AND GAS CO. AND ANOTHER <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>BRISTOW HELICOPTERS LTD. AND ANOTHER<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1976] 1 GLR 371<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

DATE:
14 JULY 1975.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

R. BANNERMAN (WITH HIM MISS SACKEY) FOR THE
PLAINTIFFS.<o:p></o:p>

PETER SWANIKER FOR THE FIRST DEFENDANTS.<o:p></o:p>

ARCHIE CASELY-HAYFORD FOR THE SECOND DEFENDANTS.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

GRIFFITHS-RANDOLPH J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF GRIFFITHS-RANDOLPH J.<o:p></o:p>[His
lordship stated the facts as summarised in the headnote and continued:]<o:p></o:p>The
arguments of counsel would appear to raise the following posers, which I shall
endeavour to answer: (1) What is the true position regarding the granting of
leave by a court in this country for the issue of a writ of summons and the
service of it on a party in another country? It is relevant to refer to the
provisions of Order 11, r. 1 (c), (e), (ee) and also rules 2A, 4 and 6 of the
High Court Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (LN 140A), which are as follows:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“1.
Service out of the jurisdiction of a writ of summons or notice of a writ of
summons may be allowed by the Court or a Judge whenever—... <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;
mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(c) any relief is sought against any
person domiciled or ordinarily resident within the jurisdiction; or ... <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;
mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(e) the action is one brought against a
defendant not domiciled or ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom to
enforce, rescind, dissolve, annul or otherwise affect a contract or to recover
damages or other relief for or in respect of the breach of a contract.—<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:1.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;
mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(i) Made within the jurisdiction, or <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:1.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;
mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(ii) made by or through an agent
trading or residing within the jurisdiction on behalf of a principal trading or
residing out of the jurisdiction, or <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:1.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;
mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(iii) by its terms or by implication to
be governed by the law of the Gold Coast [now Ghana], or is one brought against
a defendant not ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom, in respect of a
breach committed within the jurisdiction of a contract wherever made, even
though such breach was preceded or accompanied by a breach out of the
jurisdiction which rendered impossible the performance of the part of the
contract which ought to have been performed within the jurisdiction; (ee) the
action is founded on a tort committed within the jurisdiction.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">&nbsp;“2A. Notwithstanding anything contained in
rule 1 of this Order, the parties to any contract may agree (a) that the
Supreme Court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any action in respect of
such contract, and, moreover or in the alternative, (b) that service of any
writ of summons in any such action may be effected at any place within or out
of the jurisdiction on any party or on any person on behalf of any party or in
any manner specified or indicated in such contract. Service of any such writ of
summons at the place (if any) or on the party or on the person (if any) or in a
manner (if any) specified or indicated in the contract shall be deemed to be
good and effective service wherever the parties are resident, and if no place
or mode or person be so specified or indicated, service out of the jurisdiction
of such a writ may be ordered.” “4. Every application for leave to serve such
writ or notice on a defendant out of the jurisdiction shall be supported by
affidavit or other evidence, stating that in the belief of the deponent the
plaintiff has a good cause of action, and showing in what place or country such
defendant is or properly may be found, and whether such defendant is a British
subject or not, and the grounds upon which the application is made; and no such
leave shall be granted unless it shall be made sufficiently to appear to the
Co</main>