SIGMA STRATEGIC BUSINESS CONSULT LTD vs. E-SERVICES AFRICA LTD [2017]DLHC3668

Date	2017-05-23
Suit No.	SUIT NO. RPC/252/15
Citation No.	[2017]DLHC3668

GEORGE K. KOOMSON JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

EBENEZER HAIZEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF

MARTIN AGYIN- SAMPONG WITH ANDREW KHARTEY FOR THE DEFENDANT

[2017]DLHC3668
																																						<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" >SIGMA STRATEGIC BUSINESS
CONSULT LTD<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>E-SERVICES AFRICA LTD<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL
DIVISION), ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>SUIT NO. RPC/252/15&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;23RD MAY, 2017<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>EBENEZER HAIZEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF <o:p></o:p>MARTIN AGYIN- SAMPONG WITH ANDREW KHARTEY FOR THE DEFENDANT <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>GEORGE K. KOOMSON JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt">

</div>RULING<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt">

</div>&nbsp;The core issue
which I am called upon to adjudicate in this application is as to whether or
not this court has jurisdiction to grant a stay of proceedings arising out of
an interlocutory appeal filed by the Plaintiff/Applicant in the Court of
Appeal. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The Plaintiff/Applicant contends that the court has jurisdiction
and therefore pray the court to stay proceedings in the substantive suit, which
is a part- heard case pending before this court. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Let me state briefly the facts giving rise to the present
application. The Plaintiff/Applicant in an attempt to establish its claim
against the Defendant/Respondent herein called PW1. After the said witness had
completed his evidence in-chief, counsel for defendant started his cross
examination. Plaintiff’s counsel filed an application for leave to tender
certain documents. The court ruled on the said application and refused same.
The Plaintiff/Applicant therefore lodged an interlocutory appeal against the
decision of the court at the Court of Appeal. Subsequent to this, the plaintiff
has filed the present application to stay proceedings in the matter. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The defendant opposed the application on the grounds that the
application filed in the High Court is improper and referred the court to the
decision of the Supreme Court in the Republic
v Fast Track High Court, Accra, Exparte Daniel Kwasi Abodakpi, civil motion
Number J5/15/2005. <o:p></o:p>I have read the application and the supporting affidavit. I have
also considered the oral submissions of both counsel. Consideration has further
been given to the decision of the Supreme Court in Exparte Abodakpi. It is however
useful for me to quote what the Supreme Court said: <o:p></o:p>“Paragraph 17A
of the Court of Appeal Rules 1997 (C1. 19) as amended by CI. 21, make it quite
clear that in interlocutory appeals, it is the Court of Appeal, rather than the
High Court which has jurisdiction to grant an order of stay of proceedings.” <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Needless to say that this decision is binding on this court. It is
therefore the opinion of this court that the High Court has no jurisdiction to
stay the proceedings in the matter. <o:p></o:p>It is sad for me to note that before plaintiff’s counsel decided
to move his application, the court informed him of the decision in Exparte
Abodakpi and advised counsel to withdraw the application and file same at the
Court of Appeal. Well, this advise fell on deaf ears. <o:p></o:p>