ACCRA METROPOLITAN ASSEMBLY vs. ADVALUE INTERNATIONAL (GH) LTD [2017]DLHC9077

Date	2017-07-28
Suit No.	SUIT NO. CM/OCC/0508/19
Citation No.	[2017]DLHC9077

HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE JENNIFER ABENA DADZIE

SERENA DJAMSON ESQ. WITH ANASTASIA ABABIO ESQ. FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT (H/B FOR JULIANA ADDO-YOBO ESQ.)

DOROTHY DOLLEY FRIEDLANDER ESQ. FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT ABSENT

[2017]DLHC9077
																																						<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" >ACCRA METROPOLITAN ASSEMBLY<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:
.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:center;line-height:150%;border:none;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">ADVALUE INTERNATIONAL (GH) LTD.<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:
.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:center;line-height:150%;border:none;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">(DEFENDANT/APPLICANT)<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="margin:0cm;margin-bottom:
.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:center;line-height:150%;border:none;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL: <o:p></o:p>SERENA
DJAMSON, ESQ. WITH ANASTASIA ABABIO, ESQ. FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT (H/B FOR
JULIANA ADDO-YOBO, ESQ.)<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">DOROTHY DOLLEY FRIEDLANDER, ESQ. FOR
DEFENDANT/APPLICANT ABSENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p>HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE JENNIFER ABENA
DADZIE <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 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:150%;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Before
me today is a motion on notice filed by the Defendant/Applicant herein
(hereinafter, the “Applicant”) seeking leave of the Court to amend its
statement of defence pursuant to the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004
(C.I 47), Order 16 thereof.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>In the affidavit accompanying the
motion paper are the following grounds on which the Applicant bases the need
for the requested amendment.&nbsp; It is the
claim of the Applicant that the amendment has been necessitated by the fact
that new matters have been brought to the attention of Counsel by the Applicant
which must be pleaded to completely, effectively and finally determine the
matter between the parties herein and also to prevent multiplicity of
suits.&nbsp; Counsel for the Applicant further
avers in the affidavit in support of this motion that from 31st
December, 2016, she was tasked with the care of a close family member who was
hospitalised and subsequently passed and these events coupled with the conduct
of the final funeral rights on June 18, 2016 affected her appreciation of the
time lines per the rules of court.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>The Respondent is
opposed to this application on grounds which are set out in its affidavit in
opposition.&nbsp; It is the contention of the
Respondent that not only have pleadings in this suit long since closed, but the
Defendant counsel has requested for several adjournments of the Pre-trial
Settlement Conference, specifically on February 10, 2017, 1st March
2017 and March 17, 2017.&nbsp; For these
reasons, the court asked the parties to file their issues on 14th
July, 2017, which order the Respondent has complied with.&nbsp; Thus, the Respondent argues that the case has
been pending for far too long for the Applicant to be requesting for an
amendment of its defence at this late stage.&nbsp;
The Respondent further argues that if the Counsel for Applicant was so
indisposed as alleged in the affidavit in support of the motion, Counsel should
have instructed another lawyer to hold brief for her and to have given ample
notice to the court or the Respondent instead of wasting the time of both the
Court and the Respondent<o:p></o:p>In
adjudicating the matter presented before me, I have examined all the processes
filed in this case thus far by both parties.&nbsp;
I have also given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions
of the parties in this application as set out in the affidavit in support of
and against the application setting out the respective positions of the parties
herein.&nbsp; Thoughtful consideration has
also been given to the relevant provisions of the C.I 47, the case law and the
principles governing the grant or otherwise of applications of this nature. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>