KIMON COMPANIA NAVIERA S.A.R.P. AND OTHERS vs. VOLTA LINES LTD. (CONSOLIDATED) [1973]DLHC2395

Date	1973-10-18
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1973]DLHC2395

HAYFRON-BENJAMIN J.

U. V. CAMPBELL FOR THE PLAINTIFFS.

JOE REINDORF FOR THE DEFENDANT.

[1973]DLHC2395
																																						<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" >KIMON COMPANIA NAVIERA S.A.R.P. AND OTHERS <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>VOLTA LINES LTD. (CONSOLIDATED) <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;[1973]
1 GLR 140<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:
18 OCTOBER 1972.<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">

U. V. CAMPBELL FOR THE PLAINTIFFS.<o:p></o:p>

JOE REINDORF 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">

HAYFRON-BENJAMIN J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF HAYFRON-BENJAMIN J.<o:p></o:p>These are
thirteen different applications for orders to set aside the service of the
writs of summons in thirteen suits. I have taken them together because the same
issues of law and fact are raised in them.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On 10
July 1972, writs of summons were taken out on behalf of the plaintiffs claiming
various sums totalling over four million cedis from the defendant company. The
address of the plaintiffs in the title of each suit is given as “c/o Campbell
&amp; Co., House No. D.45/4, Knutsford Avenue, Accra.” The writs were taken out
by Messrs. Campbell and Company and were signed by U. V. Campbell of Apagya
Chambers, solicitor for the plaintiffs. The address of Campbell and Company is
given as P.O. Box 214, Accra and the address for service endorsed on the writ
is D.45/4, Knutsford Avenue, Accra. It is stated on the writ that U. V.
Campbell, the solicitor for the plaintiffs resides at Accra.<o:p></o:p>On the
face of the writs of summons therefore the impression is created that the
plaintiffs are companies resident or doing business in Accra, and having as
their registered office or place of business house No. D.45/4, Accra. On
receipt of the writs of summons the solicitor for the defendants rightly and
promptly wrote to the Registrar-General’s Department to ascertain whether these
companies were registered either as local companies incorporated in Ghana or as
external companies registered in Ghana under the provisions of the Companies
Code, 1963 (Act 179). The Registrar-General’s reply was in the negative. The
defendants’ solicitor was therefore justified to assume that the writs as taken
out were incompetent in that they had been taken out on behalf of persons who
have no legal capacity to sue. The purported plaintiffs are not natural
persons, they are not partnerships carrying on business in Ghana, and they are
not legal persons. The defendants’ solicitor therefore filed a motion on notice
to set aside the service of the writ. In the affidavit in support of the motion
the grounds for the application are carefully and clearly set out. The
affidavit states in paragraphs (3)-(5) that:<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">“(3) I am
advised and verily believe that the said writ is null, void, invalid and of no
effect and that the same should not have been accepted for filing and service
on defendant since it offends against Order 3, r. 4, and Order 4, r. 1 (1) of
the 1954 Rules of this court in that it does not state the address of the
plaintiff. <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">(4) I
have every reason to believe that the alleged plaintiff herein is neither a
natural person nor resident within the jurisdiction. <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">(5) I
have caused inquiries to be made at the office of the Registrar-General in
Accra, from which it appears that the plaintiff is not registered with the
Registrar-General as a Ghanaian company, firm, partnership, proprietary
businessname or other business organisation, or as a foreign company with a
place of business within the jurisdiction, or as a foreign partnership doing
business within the jurisdiction. I attach hereto marked ‘A’ a document
emanating from the Registrar-General’s Department in support of the statements
made in this paragraphs.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>This
affidavit was filed on 28 July 1972. No affidavit in opposition to the
application was filed by any of the plaintiffs. It is not shown therefore on
any affidavit whether the absence of any address of the plaintiffs is due to
inadvertence or otherwise; it is not shown on any affidavit whether or not the
plaintiffs are legal corporations or bodies and if so in which country or
countries. The plaintiffs’ solicitor contended himself with filing a notice of
amendment under Order 28, r. 1. This h</main>