RIASAND VENTURES LIMITED vs. NOBLE GOLD BIBIANI LIMITED [2017]DLCA5088

Date	2017-12-07
Suit No.	SUIT NO. H1/129/2017
Citation No.	[2017]DLCA5088

ADUAMA OSEI JA (PRESIDING)

WELBOURNE JA

KWOFIE JA

COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT/APPLICANT/APPELLANT – KIZITO BEYUO

COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT – COSMAS ANPENGNUO

[2017]DLCA5088
																																						<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" >RIASAND VENTURES LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NOBLE GOLD BIBIANI LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT/APPLICANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION), 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">

SUIT NO. H1/129/2017&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 7TH
DECEMBER, 2017<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>COUNSEL FOR
RESPONDENT/APPLICANT/APPELLANT – KIZITO BEYUO<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">

<h1 style="margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:
115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;
mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:EN-US;font-weight:normal;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">COUNSEL
FOR PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT – COSMAS ANPENGNUO<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-fareast-language:EN-US;font-weight:normal;
mso-bidi-font-weight:bold"><o:p></o:p></h1>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>ADUAMA
OSEI JA (PRESIDING), WELBOURNE JA, KWOFIE JA<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%;
border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>ADUAMA OSEI JA:<o:p></o:p>In
this judgment the Petitioner/Respondent/Respondent is referred to as “the Respondent”, and the Respondent/Applicant/Appellant is referred to
as “the Appellant”. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On
the 20th of September, 2013, the Respondent had obtained summary
judgment in the High Court in Suit No. AC.737/13 against the Appellant and when
the Appellant failed to pay the judgment debt, the Respondent had on the 5th
of February, 2014, upon a petition made to the Fast Track Division of the High
Court, obtained an order under the Bodies Corporate (Official Liquidation) Act,
1963, (Act 180) for the winding up of the Appellant, which order was made to
take effect on the 30th of June, 2014, to enable the Appellant “make all the necessary arrangements to
satisfy its indebtedness to the Petitioner Company failing which the Order
shall be effective without any further orders to that effect”. The winding
up order had been expressed to be “without
prejudice to any steps or applications that may be taken for a review or
variation of the Order in the meantime”. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On
the 15th of May, 2014, the High Court, Commercial Division, granted
an application by the Appellant which sought confirmation of a scheme of
arrangement it had proposed to its creditors, which the majority of the
creditors had accepted. Then on the basis of the Commercial Court’s confirmation
of the scheme of arrangement, the Appellant applied to the Fast Track Division
of the High Court for a stay of execution of the winding up order and, further,
for the said order to be set aside. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Among
the grounds the Appellant urged on the Fast Track Court for the setting aside
of the winding up order were:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>i)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
that “when a
court makes an order confirming a scheme of arrangement proposed by a company,
such scheme of arrangement is binding on all the creditors of the company, and
the validity of the scheme of arrangement is unimpeachable in any proceedings”,
<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>ii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
that “no
winding up can lawfully commence after a scheme of arrangement comes into
force”, <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>iii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
that “once a
majority in num</main>