OPPONG KYEKYEKU CHANCELLOR KUHL vs. YAA HELENA & 2 ORS. [2008]DLCA6558

Date	2008-07-10
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO.: H1/148/07
Citation No.	[2008]DLCA6558

BAFFOE-BONNIE J.S.C.

ARYEETEY JA

AYEBI J

GODFRED YEBOAH DAME FOR OHENE FRIMPONG FOR RESPONDENT.

APPELLANT IN PERSON

[2008]DLCA6558
																																						<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" >OPPONG KYEKYEKU
CHANCELLOR KUHL<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>YAA HELENA &amp; 2 ORS.<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS)<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">

CIVIL APPEAL NO.: H1/148/07&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: &nbsp;10TH JULY, 2008<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:
<o:p></o:p>GODFRED YEBOAH DAME FOR
OHENE FRIMPONG FOR RESPONDENT.<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">

APPELLANT
IN PERSON.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&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;&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;<o:p></o:p>BAFFOE-BONNIE J.S.C., ARYEETEY
JA, AYEBI 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="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>BAFFOE BONNIE, JSC<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The plaintiff/appellant brought an action
against the defendants/respondents claiming.<o:p></o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
A total amount of £254,000, being
compensation paid to him by the home office and Senate House University of
London, £154,000 and £160,000 respectively, as a result of the administrative
error it claimed over his LLB examination after the Snaresbrook common court
victory, the refusal of this LLB certificate which resulted in his remand both
at Pentonville Prisons and Mausdley Hospital in London for 5 months (30th
October, 2002 – 29th March, 2003) for alleged breach of Civil Injunction Order
which the University obtained against him that he had been abusive when they
invited him on 18th September 2001 for settlement at the Senate House. The
Defendants have since 15th November 2003 refused to hand over to him.<o:p></o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
First Class L.L.B. Certificate awarded to
him by the University of London which has been in their possession since 15th
November, 2003.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;3. Costs. <o:p></o:p>Attached
to this Writ of Summons was a 100 paragraph statement of claim. <o:p></o:p>The
appeal record indicate that the 1st defendant entered a conditional appearance
on 29/03/06 and on 24/04/06 she filed a motion praying the High Court to set
aside the Writ of Summons or to strike out her name from the suit. Her main
reason being that she is not the proper person to be sued as the Writ of
summons and the statement of claim disclosed no cause of action against her.
The appellant herein filed an application in opposition. The record indicate
that the Writ of summons and statement of claim were served on the 3rd
defendant Osafo Maafo through her Secretary Miss Beatrice at the Ministry. On
22/05/06, Lawyer Fred Ohene Frimpong entered a conditional appearance on behalf
of the 3rd defendant.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;On 01/06/06 the appellant filed two processes.
The first process was a motion on notice for judgment in default of Appearance
against 2nd defendant and motion on notice for judgment in default of defense
against the 3rd defendant. Both had the same return date of 14/06/06, and they
were served on the respective respondents, that is, 2nd and 3rd defendants
through their clerks.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Following a series of adjournments, occasioned
principally by the absence of the defendants and/or their counsel, the matter
was set down for hearing on the 7th November. On that day the trail judge
defined the parameters of the work for the day. He indicated that there were 3
applications before him; the first by the 1st defendant seeking to get her name
struck out from the writ, and the 2nd and 3rd were by the appellant herein
praying for default judgments against the 2nd and 3rd defendants. The court
then noted that since the application to strike out the name of the 1st
defendant was earlier in point of time that should be taken first. Moving the
application on behalf of the 1st defendant counsel for the 1st defendant prayed
in aid Order 9 rule 8 and Order 11 rule 18 and submitted that applying the
cumulative import of these two rules to the case of plaintiff against the 1st
defendant, the court should hold that there was no cause of action disclosed by
the 100 paragraph statement of claim against the 1st defendant. <o:p></o:p>The
writ should therefore be set aside against her. Before the appellant herein
could move his application for default judgment against both the 2nd and 3rd
defendants, Fred Ohene Frimpong who announced himself as appearing for the 2nd
and 3rd defendants, prayed to raise a preliminary objection to the proceedings.
He submitted that the mode of service of the writ of summons on the 2nd
defendant, that is, through a facsimile (Fax) is wrong. Further the 2nd and 3rd
defendants ought to have been sued in their official capacities and therefore
through the Attorney General. The proceedings for t</main>