AIRTEL GHANA LIMITED vs. SURFLINE COMMUNICATION LTD [2017]DLHC4006

Date	2017-04-11
Suit No.	SUIT NO: GJ/1398/2016
Citation No.	[2017]DLHC4006

JUSTICE KWEKU T. ACKAAH-BOAFO

VICTORIA BARTH FOR THE PLAINTIFF/ APPLICANT

MR. SAMMANI ZACHARY FOR THE DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT

[2017]DLHC4006
																																						<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" >AIRTEL GHANA LIMITED<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>SURFLINE COMMUNICATION LTD<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;
line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:
Calibri;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">[HIGH
COURT (GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION, COURT 6) 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">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-left:2.5in;text-align:center;
text-indent:-2.5in;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">SUIT
NO: GJ/1398/2016&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: <span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;
font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;mso-bidi-font-family:
&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">11TH APRIL, 2017<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>VICTORIA
BARTH FOR THE PLAINTIFF/ 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">

MR. SAMMANI ZACHARY FOR THE DEFENDANT/
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">

<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;
mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">JUSTICE KWEKU T. ACKAAH-BOAFO<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">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>I.
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Introduction:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[1]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; By an application for judgment in default of appearance by
the Plaintiff/Applicant on February 8, 2017, I granted the application and
awarded the Applicant herein cost of Gh¢5,000
and dismissed the Applicant’s prayer for 10% of the amount endorsed on the writ
of summons as cost. The Applicant herein has filed the instant application for
review of the cost awarded pursuant to Order 74 Rule 12 of the High
Court Civil Procedure Rules, (2004) C.I. 47. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[2]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Accompanying
the application is a 26 paragraph affidavit with attached exhibits sworn to by
a Precious-Rhoda Edwei Akpabey of Sam Okudzeto &amp; Associates Solicitors and
filed on February 22, 2017. It is the case of the Applicant that the cost
awarded is inadequate based on all of the facts including the filing fees paid,
the work done by Counsel and legal fees paid by the Applicant. In an affidavit
in opposition sworn to by Aureal Asare-Boateng on behalf of the
Defendant/Respondent and filed on March 3, 2017 it is averred that the cost
awarded is fair albeit a burden on the Defendant having regard to its present
financial circumstances.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>II.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Arguments for &amp; Against the
Application:<o:p></o:p>[3]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Relying on the
depositions in the affidavit in support, Counsel submitted that the cost
awarded was inadequate based on expenses reasonably incurred. Learned Counsel
submitted that the Applicant is not insisting on the 10% of the amount endorsed
on the writ of summons as costs earlier made to the Court. Counsel submitted
that the writ was filed on October 14, 2016 and the Defendant was served on
October 25, 2016 and on January 17, 2017 when the time for entering of
Appearance had elapsed, the Plaintiff/Applicant filed the application for
judgment in default of Appearance with the return date of January 31, 2017. It
is the case of the Applicant as averred that the application was served on the
Defendant on January 18, 2017 but on the return date the Court ordered that
“hearing notice</main>