EDWARD ABANG MARLEY vs. EBO JUNIOR, MAWU DZAKE, TEACHER ADZRAKU ALHAJI AND MADAM AMERLEY [2017]DLCA4655

EDWARD ABANG MARLEY vs. EBO JUNIOR, MAWU DZAKE, TEACHER ADZRAKU ALHAJI AND MAD... [2017]DLCA4655

Date	2017-07-12
Suit No.	SUIT NO.CI/32/2015
Citation No.	[2017]DLCA4655

ADJEI J.A

SOWAH J.A

MENSAH J.A

WISDOM ANTONIO ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT

SETH WIAFE DANKWA ESQ. FOR THE DEFENDNAT/RESPONDENT

[2017]DLCA4655
																																						<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" >EDWARD ABANG MARLEY <o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>EBO JUNIOR, MAWU DZAKE, TEACHER ADZRAKU ALHAJI AND MADAM AMERLEY <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, KOFORIDUA]<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">

SUIT NO.CI/32/2015&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; &nbsp;&nbsp;DATE: 12TH JULY, 2017<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>WISDOM ANTONIO ESQ. FOR
THE PLAINTIFF/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">

SETH
WIAFE DANKWA ESQ. FOR THE DEFENDNAT/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">

</div>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;<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="MsoNormalCxSpFirst" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:
.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>Adjei,
J.A:<o:p></o:p>This interlocutory appeal
was filed against the ruling of the High Court Koforidua, delivered on 8th
July, 2016 which struck out the plaintiff’s suit as constituting an abuse of
the process of the Court on the ground that there was an identical suit pending
in the same High Court.<o:p></o:p>The Plaintiff/Appellant
who will be referred to in this appeal as the Plaintiff, dissatisfied with the
ruling of the trial High Court delivered on 8th July,2016 filed an
appeal against same to this Court. The Plaintiff filed five grounds of appeal which
are as follows:<o:p></o:p>“a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the trial High Court judge erred in law
which occasioned a miscarriage of justice to the Plaintiff/Appellant when she
held that the correct procedure the Plaintiff/Appellant should have adopted in
this suit was to seek a renewal of an expired writ of summons failed in suit
no. C1/81/2013 and not discontinuance of the said Suit No. C1/81/2013 before
filing Suit No. C1/32/2015.<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the trial High Court Judge erred
in law which occasioned a miscarriage of justice to the Plaintiff/Appellant
when she filed to appreciate the position of the law that the Defendants/Respondents
if mindful should have properly objected to the&nbsp;
filing of Suit No. C1/32/2015 by way of&nbsp;
an application before filing&nbsp;
their defences and it is not proper to raise an objection to the suit in
their Witness Statements after the matter has proceeded to Case Management
Conference stage.<o:p></o:p>c.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the trial High Court Judge erred
in law which occasioned&nbsp; a
miscarriage&nbsp; of justice to the Plaintiff/Appellant
when she held that Suit No. C1/81/2013 which was discontinued against 5
Defendants/Respondents was pending against them.<o:p></o:p>d.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the trial High Court Judge erred
in law which occasioned a miscarriage of justice to the Plaintiff/Appellant
when she failed or refused to appreciate the fact that it was the 6th
Defendant/Respondent who applied on his own volition to join Suit No.
C1/32/2015 as the 6th Defendant/Respondent.<o:p></o:p>e.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the trial High Court Judge erred
in law which occasioned a miscarriage of justice to the Plaintiff/Appellant
when she failed to appreciate the position of the law that an application to
set aside any&nbsp; proceeding for&nbsp; any irregularity shall not be&nbsp; allowed unless it is made within the
reasonable time and the party applying has not taken any fresh step after the
knowledge of the irregularity”.<o:p></o:p>We shall address ground (c
) of the appeal as it&nbsp; will dispose off
the&nbsp; entire appeal. The basis for the
trial&nbsp; High Court judge’s ruling was
grounded on the fact that&nbsp; there was a
suit pending in the High Court involving the same subject matter, the plaintiff
and the 6th defendant herein and thus it constituted an abuse of the
process of the Court for the Plaintiff to institute the suit which&nbsp; has culminated in this appeal. The trial High
Court Judge was of the opinion that once a matter involving the same subject
matter and the same parties or where one of the defendants in the first suit is
also a party in the second suit, the second suit should&nbsp; be dismissed for constituting an abuse of the
process of the Court. To buttress the Judge’s position we shall refer to page
127 of the record of appeal where she held thus:<o:p></o:p>