CHARLES LAWRENCE QUIST vs. AHMED DANAWI [2015]DLSC3257

Date	2015-11-05
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J7/8/2015
Citation No.	[2015]DLSC3257

WOOD C. J. (PRESIDING)

ANSAH J.S.C.

DOTSE J.S.C.

ANIN YEBOAHJ.S.C.

BAFFOE - BONNIE J.S.C.

BENIN J.S.C.

AKAMBA J.S.C.

JAMES AHENKORAH ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT /APPELLANT/APPLICANT.

E. K. AMUA SEKYI ESQ. WITH HIM ELEEN LADY ERSKINE (MRS.) ESQ. FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/ RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT.

[2015]DLSC3257
																																						<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>&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. J7/8/2015&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;DATE: 5TH NOVEMBER, 2015<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>JAMES
AHENKORAH ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT /APPELLANT/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">

E.
K. AMUA SEKYI ESQ. WITH HIM ELEEN LADY ERSKINE (MRS.) ESQ. FOR
THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/ RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT.<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">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;mso-outline-level:1;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">WOOD C. J. (PRESIDING),
ANSAH J.S.C., DOTSE J.S.C., ANIN YEBOAHJ.S.C., BAFFOE - BONNIE J.S.C., BENIN
J.S.C., AND AKAMBA J.S.C.&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">

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

</div>DOTSE,
JSC:-<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;By this application, the Plaintiff/Applicant,
hereafter referred to as the Applicant is seeking a review of the decision of
the ordinary bench of this court, delivered on 29th July 2015
wherein the Defendant/ Respondent, hereafter referred to as the Respondent, was
adjudged as having been successful in the appeal launched by him which
accordingly set aside the decision of the trial court and allowed the appeal of
the Respondent herein.<o:p></o:p>In
order to understand in proper context, the issues upon which the Applicant
herein filed the instant review application, we have decided to set out in
extenso, the relevant parts of the affidavit of the Applicant in support of the
application for review as follows:-<o:p></o:p>The
Applicant deposed to in paragraphs 8, through to 23 as follows:-<o:p></o:p>8.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ”Incidentally, after the denial of this
title and my father had positively evinced an intention to eject them from the
land, the respondent and his brother offered to appease him by sending a cheque
by letter to his lawyer as rent advance for ten years, but my father refused to
accept the cheque to pay him rent so he did not cash the cheque and allowed it
to go stale.<o:p></o:p>9.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; As part of his case my father made
reference in his statement of claim to this offer to pay him rent to induce him
to get him to waive his right to forfeit the lease and contended that because
he did not cash the cheque the forfeiture had not been waived.<o:p></o:p>10.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In his statement of defence the
respondent did not deny the offer of the cheque to induce my father to waive
his right to forfeit the lease and that the cheque rejected by not being
cashed; rather the respondent relied on the offer of the cheque and the view
that the denial of title was by their lawyer to plead that the court ought to
grant him relief against forfeiture. He, however never contended that though
the cheque was not cashed my father had nevertheless did something to waive the
forfeiture.<o:p></o:p>11.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Because of that the case proceeded on
only two issues, namely, whether there has been a denial of my father’s title
and whether relief could be granted against forfeiture upon denial of a
landlord’s title, but in its judgment the court found the respondent and his
brother guilty of denying my father’s title but said nothing about the plea for
relief against forfeiture.<o:p></o:p>12.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The respondent appealed to the Court of
Appeal against the decision that he and his brother had committed an act
amounting to denial of their landlord’s title and also raised a technical point
that the trial was a nullity because the court did wrongly adopt the prior
proceedings in the case.<o:p></o:p>13.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal on
the jurisdictional point and the case ordered to go back to the High Court for
a retrial to deal with the issues raised on the pleadings.<o:p></o:p>14.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; My father had then died and I had been
substituted for him, so I appealed to the Supreme Court complaining against the
decision of the Court of Appeal nullifying the trial court proceedings and the
Supreme Court allowed the appeal.<o:p></o:p>15.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; However, instead of returning the case to
t</main>