KWADDEY vs. OKANTEY [1971]DLHC2230

Date	1971-05-25
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1971]DLHC2230

COUSSEY J.

MRS. COBBINA FOR PETER ADJETEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

NELSON COFIE FOR THE DEFENDANT.

[1971]DLHC2230
																																						<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" >KWADDEY <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>OKANTEY <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT,
ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1972] 2 GLR 84<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:
25 MAY 1971.<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">

MRS. COBBINA FOR PETER ADJETEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p>

NELSON COFIE FOR THE DEFENDANT.<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">

COUSSEY J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF COUSSEY J.<o:p></o:p>[His
lordship stated the facts as summarised in the headnote and continued:] It is
my view that the defendant has for a considerable period of time been wanting
to be appointed a magistrate. It has been reported by counsel for the plaintiff
that he has at long last succeeded. But it seems that in his desperation, he
made certain promises such as his own admission that he copied to the
plaintiff, a letter addressed to the Minister of Justice, to the effect that for
a consideration of such an appointment he would not pursue his case. I have
therefore no hesitation in disbelieving his story that he did not receive £G200
as consideration for not pursuing his action against the plaintiff when there
was a delay in getting Ayeh Kumi to help him to get the job as a magistrate. I
find as a fact that he did ask for £G300 and received £G200 to stop his action
against the plaintiff and that this amounts to an agreement to compromise the
earlier action.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It is the
law that an agreement to compromise an action may amount to a good
consideration: See Callisher v. Bischoffsheim (1870) L.R. 5 Q.B. 449 and Miles
v. New Zealand Alford Estate Co. (1886) 32 Ch.D. 266. Consequently, the
defendant’s offer to stop further litigation on being paid £G200 was good
consideration from which he could not resile.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiff therefore succeeds in her claim and I hereby make (1) a declaration
that under and by virtue of a compromise concluded between the plaintiff and
the defendant on or about the first half of 1965 in respect of the judgment of
the Court of Appeal delivered in favour of the defendant on 29 May 1959, the
defendant has waived all his rights or other interests in the said judgment and
that he is not entitled to proceed to execution thereon and (2) a perpetual
injunction restraining the defendant, his servants, agents and licensees from
interferring with the plaintiff’s possession or ownership of house No. F. 526/2
Christiansborg or the land on which it is situated or otherwise dealing with
the said house and land. Costs to the plaintiff inclusive are assessed at
¢250.00.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></main>