DRT GHANA LIMITED (PLAINTIFF) vs. RALPH CASELY HAYFORD (DEFENDANT) [2001]DLHC7405

Date	2001-06-22
Suit No.	SUIT NO. C259/2000
Citation No.	[2001]DLHC7405

HIS LORDSHIP MRS. H. INKUMSAH-ABBAN J.

[2001]DLHC7405
																																						<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" >DRT GHANA LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>RALPH CASELY HAYFORD<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

HIS LORDSHIP MRS. H. INKUMSAH-ABBAN,
J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

</div>This
is a motion on notice for Dismissal of suit on grounds that the action
discloses no reasonable cause of action and as being abusive of the process of
the Court. <o:p></o:p>The
Applicant's Counsel in the main argued that the agreement which was made orally
came into existence with the person of Mr Abbey at a time when the Plaintiff
Company was not in existence. Hence Counsel submitted that the contract being
between the 2 individuals the defendant cannot therefore be sued by the
Plaintiff Company which was then non-existent. <o:p></o:p>The
Plaintiff/Respondent opposed the application on grounds that although the
agreement was originally made orally between the 2 individuals before the formation
of the Company, parts of the contract ie at least 2 out of 3 of the contracts
were entered into after the incorporation of the Plaintiff Company &amp; the
issue of its Certificate to commence business. <o:p></o:p>After
considering submission on both sides and examining the exhibits of both parties
it is clear that parts of the contracts were entered into and carried out after
the incorporation of the Plaintiff Company. <o:p></o:p>In
the circumstances it is not totally wrong for the Plaintiff Company to sue the
Defendant. The action need not therefore be dismissed. I also support the
Plaintiff/Respondent's argument that Mr Abbey who in his personal capacity
entered into the original oral contract with the Defendant be joined as a party
pursuant to Order 15 rule 6 (2) (b) of LI 1129. Order 15 rule 6 (2) (b) states:
<o:p></o:p>"At any stage of the proceedings
the Court may on such terms as it thinks just and either of its own motion or
on application ------------------------ order any person who ought to have been
joined as a party, or whose presence before the Court is necessary to ensure
that all matters in dispute in the proceedings may effectually and completely
determined and adjudicated upon, to be added as a party". <o:p></o:p>In
the circumstances the application is dismissed. It is however ordered pursuant
to Order 15 rule 6 (2) (b) that Mr Abbey be joined as Co-Plaintiff, Costs of
¢200,000. <o:p></o:p>

Suit
to take its normal course.<o:p></o:p></main>