GALAXY OIL GH LTD vs. AFKO FISHRIES LTD [2017]DLHC3689

Date	2017-10-18
Suit No.	SUIT NO. RPC/302/14
Citation No.	[2017]DLHC3689

GEORGE K. KOOMSON JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

DR. PHILIP ANDERSON FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

ROBERTSON KPATA FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT

[2017]DLHC3689
																																						<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" >GALAXY OIL GH LTD<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>AFKO FISHRIES LTD<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL
DIVISION), ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>SUIT NO. RPC/302/14&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 18TH OCTOBER, 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>DR. PHILIP ANDERSON FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT <o:p></o:p>ROBERTSON KPATA FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT <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>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>This is an application to set aside the garnishee Order absolute,
the court made on the 8th August, 2017. I have read the application
and the supporting affidavit. I have also listened to the submissions of
counsel. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>I must say that Order 47 rule 5 of C.I.47 requires the court to
consider any dispute to liability to pay by the garnishee. On the 8th August,
2017, the garnishee’s representative was in court. He did not dispute the
liability to pay. As a matter of fact, when the representative of the garnishee
was asked if there is any cause for the court not to order the garnishee to pay
the debt, he stated that, there was a facility which the bank had granted to
the Defendant/Judgment/Debtor in respect of a different account. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It has been contended that the judgment debtor owes the garnishee
so the garnishee has a right of set-off against the judgment debtor. This right
might be an inherent right. <o:p></o:p>However, where a party has a right but decide not to exercise same
for reasons best known to the bank, the indolence of the bank cannot be used to
scuttle the right of another party who has been deligent. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The Order Nisi was served on the garnishee but they refused or
neglected to take any action to enforce their said inherent right. The
enjoyment of right by persons, legal or natural is dependent on their desire to
pursue these rights. Having agreed in court that the money they hold can be
paid to the judgment/creditor, I believe it is too late for the garnishee to
say that they now want to exercise their right of set-off. In any case, the
allegation of debt averred by the Defendant/Judgment/Debtor to the garnishee
was not supported with any documentation at the time the garnishee appeared in
court. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In my view the indolence of the garnishee has caused their dearly;
in the circumstance, I dismiss the application. No order as to costs. <o:p></o:p>

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