STARCOM BROADCASTING SERVICES vs. LA CHAUMIERE RESTAURANT & 2 ORS. [2007]DLCA6972

Date	2007-03-09
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO: Hl/238/04
Citation No.	[2007]DLCA6972

ARYEETEY J.A (PRESIDING)

KANYOKE J.A

BROWN J

MR. KWESI AFRIFA FOR THE CO-DEFENDANT/APPELLANT.

MR. MUERELL LOGAN FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT.

[2007]DLCA6972
																																						<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" >STARCOM BROADCASTING SERVICES<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>LA CHAUMIERE RESTAURANT &amp; 2 ORS.<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/ CO -DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, 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">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">CIVIL
APPEAL NO: Hl/238/04 &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; &nbsp; &nbsp; DATE: 9TH MARCH 2007<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR.
KWESI AFRIFA FOR THE CO-DEFENDANT/APPELLANT.<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">

&nbsp;MR. MUERELL LOGAN FOR THE
PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>ARYEETEY
J.A (PRESIDING), KANYOKE J.A, BROWN J<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>KANYOKE
J.A:<o:p></o:p>The
facts of this case are as follows: The Plaintiffs/Respondents (herein after
referred to as the Respondents) extended a short term credit facility to a
company named Messers Allied Trades and Finance (ATF) which was secured by an
Agreement of the property known as plot No. 64A Airport Residential Area,
Accra, owned by the 2nd co-defendant/Appellant. A.T.F defaulted on the loan and
the Respondents attempted to realize the collateral whereupon the
co-defendants/Appellants (herein thereafter referred to as the appellants).
Commenced suit No. L 114/02 in the High Court against the Respondents and their
Managing Director, Frank Okyere for a declaration that the Deed of Assignment
by which the loan was secured was a forgery and therefore invalid. <o:p></o:p>The
Respondents counterclaimed for inter alia,<o:p></o:p>"(a) a declaration that the
Assignment between 2nd defendant acting on behalf of the plaintiff and the 1st
defendant was validly executed and is legally binding on the parties
thereto" <o:p></o:p>The
High court upon a summons for summary judgment entered judgment for the
Respondents in their counterclaim but that judgment was reversed by the court
of Appeal which remitted the case back to the High court to be heard on its
merits. Meanwhile the respondents had filed a motion for an order to restrain
the 2nd appellant herein from collecting accumulated and future rent and for an
order that such rent be paid into court. But by the time this motion came up
for hearing the court of Appeal had already delivered its judgment so the
application was struck out. The Respondents appealed against the judgment of
the court of Appeal to the Supreme Court and then repeated the application
before the court of Appeal to restrain the 2nd appellant from collecting accrued
rent and for an order that the accrued rent and further rent for the disputed
property be paid into court pending the determination of the suit. The court of
Appeal however declined to entertain the application on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction. The application was accordingly struck out as withdrawn.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Then on the 4th February 2004 the Respondents
instituted a fresh action by a writ of summons against the defendant claiming
"as per statement of claim." This writ was served together with the
statement of claim on the defendant. By paragraph 5 of the statement of claim
the Respondents claimed against the defendant.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;"(a) Perpetual injunction restraining the
defendant from paying rent to the previous owners, Oyoko Contractors Ltd or in
the alternative <o:p></o:p>(b) An order to compel the defendant
to pay the accumulated rent and rent advance into court pending the
determination of ownership of the premises between the plaintiff and Oyoko
Contractors." <o:p></o:p>On
the 18th February 2004 the appellants herein filed a motion on notice
"praying this Honorable Court for an order joining the applicants (i.e.
the appellants herein) to the above named suit in terms of the accompanying
affidavit. This motion was scheduled to be heard on the 25th February 2004. It
was in fact so heard and granted on the said 25th February 2004. Then on the
2nd March 2004 the appellants purportedly filed conditional Appearance to the
action and on the same 2-3-2004 the appellants at 9.32 am filed a motion on
notice as follows: <o:p></o:p>“
Suit No. B Misc. 374/2004 <o:p></o:p>Starcom
Broadcasting Services - Plaintiff <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; V <o:p></o:p>La
Chaumiere Restaurant - Defendant <o:p></o:p>1.
Nana Ama Serwaa Gyasi<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;2. Oyoko Contractors Ltd - Co-defendants <o:p></o:p>Motion on Notice<o:p></o:p>