ALLIANCE MARINE SERVICES vs. THE VESSEL M/V JAMESTOWN OWNERS AND DWC EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION CO. LTD [2014]DLSC3001

ALLIANCE MARINE SERVICES vs. THE VESSEL M/V JAMESTOWN OWNERS AND DWC EXPLORATION... [2014]DLSC3001

Date	2014-11-14
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO.J8/3/2015
Citation No.	[2014]DLSC3001

BENIN J.S.C

KWAME NYANKOM TETTEH ESQ. FOR THE APPLICANT.

JOEL ANNOR-AFARI ESQ REPRESENTING KUEYEHIA & NUTSUKPUI FOR THE RESPONDENT

[2014]DLSC3001
																																						<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" >ALLIANCE
MARINE SERVICES<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE VESSEL
M/V JAMESTOWN OWNERS AND DWC EXPLORATION &amp; PRODUCTION CO. LTD<o:p></o:p>&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.J8/3/2015&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 14TH NOVEMBER, 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>KWAME
NYANKOM TETTEH ESQ. FOR THE APPLICANT.<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">

BENIN
J.S.C. SITTING AS A SINGLE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&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>

</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">

JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>BENIN,
JSC:-<o:p></o:p>On June 6 2013, the Court
of Appeal gave judgment in this action against the Defendants/Appellants/Appellants/Respondents
who are hereafter described as the appellants/respondents and in favour of the
Plaintiff/Respondent/Respondent/Applicant who is hereafter described as the
respondent/applicant. The facts in that action are not relevant to recount in
this application which is for an order directed at the appellants/respondents
to provide bank guarantee pending the hearing and determination of their appeal
to this court, as ordered by the Court of Appeal in an earlier decision. What matters
is that the losing party filed an appeal against the Court of Appeal judgment
to this court. In view of what transpired in court when counsel for the respondent/applicant
sought to argue the present application, it has become necessary to dispose of
some preliminary but fundamental procedural matters before proceeding to
consider the application. <o:p></o:p>In order to appreciate the
preliminary issue/s it is necessary to reproduce material parts of the Notice
of Appeal here for their full force and effect. They provide thus:<o:p></o:p>‘PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that
the Defendants/Appellants/Appellants herein being dissatisfied with and
aggrieved by the judgment dated 6th June 2013 delivered by the Court
of Appeal……….DO HEREBY appeal to the Supreme Court upon the grounds set out in
paragraph 2 hereof and will at the hearing of the appeal seek the reliefs set
out in paragraph 3 hereof.<o:p></o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; PART
OF THE JUDGMENT AND RULING COMPLAINED OF……….<o:p></o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; GROUNDS
OF APPEAL………………….<o:p></o:p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; RELIEF
SOUGHT FROM THE SUPREME COURT…………<o:p></o:p>4.