CHARLES LAWRENCE QUIST vs. AHMED DANAWI [2015]DLSC3223

Date	2015-07-29
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/63/2013
Citation No.	[2015]DLSC3223

WOOD (MRS) C.J. (PRESIDING)

ANSAH J.S.C

DOTSE J.S.C

BONNIE J.S.C

AKAMBA J.S.C

E. K. AMUA SEKYI ESQ. WITH HIM CYNTHIA OPARE ESQ. FOR THE DEFENDANT /APPELLANT / APPELLANT.

JAMES AHENKORAH ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT RESPONDENT.

[2015]DLSC3223
																																						<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" >CHARLES LAWRENCE QUIST<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>AHMED DANAWI<o:p></o:p>[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. J4/63/2013&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&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: 29TH
JULY, 2015<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>E.
K. AMUA SEKYI ESQ. WITH HIM CYNTHIA OPARE ESQ. FOR THE DEFENDANT
/APPELLANT / 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">

JAMES
AHENKORAH ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

WOOD (MRS), C.J. (PRESIDING) ANSAH, J.S.C DOTSE,
J.S.C BONNIE, J.S.C AND AKAMBA, J.S.C<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">

JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>BAFFOE-BONNIE JSC:-<o:p></o:p>On 17/1/77 the defendants/appellants, The Danawis,
hereinafter defendants, entered into an agreement with the plaintiff/respondents,
Emmanuel Charles Quist, hereinafter plaintiff in respect of a plot of land.&nbsp; They and a third person Fisal Danawi also
entered into a lease agreement in respect of an adjoining land this time with
one E.C. Quist-Therson. They developed the two plots into commercial premises
from where they conducted their business.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Sometime later Nii Kwabena Bonnie, Osu Alata
Mantse, brought an action against them in respect of the land granted by Quist
Therson claiming that the land formed part of Osu Alata stool. The High Court,
coram, Osei Hwere J (as he then was), declared title in respect of the other plot
of land in the Osu Alata Mantse&nbsp; making
Nii Kwabena Bonne the new landlord of the defendants in respect of the adjoining
plot of land.<o:p></o:p>I wish here to reiterate that the original lessors
in the original transactions were Charles Quist (the plaintiff herein) and
QUIST THERSON in respect of the other plot of land.<o:p></o:p>On 21/April/1992, claiming that the defendants
were in arrears of rent from 1982, the plaintiff wrote a letter to the
defendants reminding them of the arrears of rent.&nbsp; But this letter was no ordinary reminder of
non-payment of rent. The letter carried in its belly a speculation that the
defendants’ failure to pay rent was due to an opinion the defendants had formed
that the plaintiff was no longer their landlord by virtue of the judgment of
Osei Hwere J (as he then was), in respect of the other plot. He then continued<o:p></o:p>”if
that is correct then you are in breach of a fundamental obligation on your part
as lessees, namely, the obligation to respect and not to dispute, challenge or
throw any doubt on your landlord’s title to the property leased or let out to
you. By so doing you have in law rendered the lease liable to forfeiture and my
client hereby gives you formal notice that he has forfeited the lease…..”<o:p></o:p>So the letter that set out to remind the
respondent of his rent arrears went on to speculate on a reason for the
non-payment of rent and concluded that based on that reason the defendant had
denied the landlord’s title and thereby rendered her lease liable to
forfeiture! The letter that started with a reminder of nonpayment of rent ended
as a notice to quit, not for arrears of rent but on the grounds of denial of
title<o:p></o:p>In reply the defendant counsel wrote on the 24th
of April 1992 denying that there was an arrears of rent for that length of time
saying the receipts, (which he enclosed) showed that rent had been paid up to
December 1991 leaving arrears of rent of only about 4 months.&nbsp; He however concluded that based on the
judgment of Osei Hwere J <o:p></o:p>“you
will agree with me that until the appeal is disposed of it will be unwise for
my clients to pay rent to your client since the judgment of Osei Hwere J is to
the effect that the land belongs to the Osu Alata Stool and not your client.’<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Three days later, i.e. on 27/4/92 the counsel
again wrote another letter repeating the fact of having paid rent up to 1991
and concluded as follows<o:p></o:p>“Be
that as it may, I enclose herewith cheque in the sum of ¢12,000 cedis being 10
years ground rent from 1992 to 2002 at ¢1,200 pe</main>