DR. LAWRENCE BOAKYE vs. YAW BOAKYE [2014]DLSC2845

Date	2014-04-30
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J8/51/2014
Citation No.	[2014]DLSC2845

AKAMBA J.S.C.

MR. YONI KULENDI FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/APPLICANT WITH HIM DENNIS

ADJEI DWUMOH GEORGINA ARTHUR AND ROSENBERG OWUSU ADOKOH.

JUSTINA TETE-DONKOR WITH HER CHRIS YEBOAH FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT /RESPONDENT PRESENT

[2014]DLSC2845
																																						<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" >DR. LAWRENCE BOAKYE<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>YAW BOAKYE&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>&nbsp;&nbsp; [SUPREME 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">

CIVIL
APPEAL NO. J8/51/2014&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: &quot;Book Antiqua&quot;, serif; font-size: 13.3333px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">&nbsp;
DATE: 30TH
APRIL, 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>MR. YONI KULENDI FOR
DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/APPLICANT WITH HIM DENNIS ADJEI DWUMOH, GEORGINA ARTHUR AND
ROSENBERG OWUSU ADOKOH.<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">

JUSTINA
TETE-DONKOR WITH HER CHRIS YEBOAH FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT /RESPONDENT PRESENT<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 1.0pt 0in">

AKAMBA J.S.C. SITTING AS A SINGLE
JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT <o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT<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">

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

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>This
is a motion on Notice for an order to suspend the refusal of the grant of stay
of execution pending appeal and for stay of proceedings consequent upon the
order of refusal to stay execution delivered by the Court of Appeal on 19th&nbsp;&nbsp; March, 2014. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
Respondent in this application invoked the original jurisdictions of the high
court seeking a number of reliefs. After a closely contested trial between the
parties, the High Court entered judgment in favour of the Respondent declaring
him owner of the property Plot No. 61A Airport Residential Area Accra and
damages for trespass.&nbsp;&nbsp; The Applicants
counter claim was also dismissed.&nbsp;
Dissatisfied with the said judgment the Applicant filed a Notice of
Appeal and subsequently an application for stay of execution pending the
hearing of the Appeal.&nbsp; The trial judge
dismissed the application which was then&nbsp;
repeated at the Court of Appeal.&nbsp;
The Court of Appeal on 19th March, 2014 dismissed the
application.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
Applicant who labels the court of Appeal decision as erroneous and occasioning
a miscarriage of justice has filed the present motion for an order to suspend
the order of refusal and for a stay of proceedings consequent upon the order of
refusal to stay execution.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>I
have carefully considered the&nbsp; arguments
of both counsel in this application as well as read the motion paper and the
supporting affidavits and annexures and those in opposition.&nbsp; I have come to the view that no exceptional
circumstances beyond or additional to those elements summarised by Akufo&nbsp; Addo JSC in the case of Joseph V.&nbsp; Jebeille (1963) I GLR 387 have been urged on
me to warrant a grant of this prayer.&nbsp;
This is a necessary requirement for the grant of an order to suspend an
order of a lower court or a stay of proceedings consequent upon an order
refusing an application for stay of execution as pithily stated by my respected
brother, Dr. Date Bah, JSC in Golden Beach Hotels (GH) Ltd. vs. Pack Plus Int.
Ltd (2012(&nbsp; SCGLR 452 at 459 thus :&nbsp; “According to the argument we earlier
advanced in this ruling, the criterion for suspending an order of&nbsp; a lower court should not be identical with
the&nbsp; criterion summarised by Akufo Addo
JSC in the Jebeille case in relation to applications for stay of execution, but
should embody an additional&nbsp; element or
requirement.&nbsp; The precise nature of
this&nbsp; additional element or requirement
we would&nbsp; leave to&nbsp; subsequent cases to develop.&nbsp; However, subject to fine-tuning in the light
of the facts of subsequent cases we would propose that a possible test could be
the nugatory effect&nbsp; referred&nbsp; to in the Jebeille case (supra), combined
with the need for exceptional circumstances.&nbsp;
If&nbsp; this test of a “nugatory
effect-plus more” is&nbsp; not insisted upon,
there would be no point in maintaining the distinction between the two kinds of
orders, namely, stay of execution and suspension of orders of lower courts”.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>From
the affidavit evidence before me especially, the affidavit in opposition filed
on 8th April, 2014 paragraphs 13, 19 and 26 which have not been
discounted, the applicant does not live in the premises himself and will thus
not suffer any hardship should this application be refused.&nbsp; On the contrary it is the Respondent who
would be frustrated and deprived of the fruits of his victory for&nbsp;&nbsp; no good reason, should this application be
granted. Accordingly this application fails and it is dismissed. <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;I make no order as to costs.<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;&n</main>