KWADWO OPOKU & ANOTHER vs. ERIC KOFI BOATENG [2018]DLCA9936

Date	2018-02-06
Suit No.	SUIT NO. OCC 80/2017
Citation No.	[2018]DLCA9936

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE

ANITA ASHONG-KATAI FOR PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT

AMA ASSENSO FOR DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

[2018]DLCA9936
																																						<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" >KWADWO
OPOKU &amp; ANOTHER<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ERIC
KOFI BOATENG<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, KUMASI]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:normal;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">SUIT NO. OCC 80/2017&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;&nbsp;
&nbsp;DATE: 6TH FEBRUARY
2018<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>ANITA
ASHONG-KATAI FOR PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:normal;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">AMA ASSENSO FOR DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HIS
LORDSHIP JUSTICE DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:normal;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>This
ruling seeks to determine the merits of the preliminary legal objection
challenging the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court from hearing an
application for an order appointing a receiver under Order 27(1) of the High
Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (CI 47) and for an ancillary injunction order
under Order 27(2) of CI 47.<o:p></o:p>The
issue of “whether or not the suit has been commenced in the proper forum” is
one of the issues set out for trial. The court,however, decided to hear and
determine this preliminary legal issue in a bid to ensure speedy and effective
justice as required by Order 1 rule 1(2) of CI 47. This is coupled with the
fact that the issue of jurisdiction of the court can be raised at any time. See
Republic v High Court Denu, Ex-parte Avadali IV [1993/94] 1GLR 561 at 562
(holding 1).<o:p></o:p>I
have carefully considered the arguments advanced by both counsel. While counsel
for the defendant/respondent argues that the commercial court has no
jurisdiction to entertain the motion, as the suit relates to land not commerce,
counsel for the plaintiff/applicant submits that the substance of the suit
shows that the reliefs are commercial in nature and as such the commercial
court has the jurisdiction to hear same. Counsel for the defendant/respondent
submits that the enactment of Order 58 of CI 47 which sets out matters which
could be tried by the commercial court limits it to only matters specified in
the Order, therefore the commercial court has no jurisdiction to try matters
that are not set out in the Order. Both counsel agree that the Commercial Court
has jurisdiction to try commercial claims.<o:p></o:p>Rule
58.1(2) of UK’s Civil Procedure Rules, 1998 defines ‘commercial claims’ to
mean:<o:p></o:p>“Any claim arising out of
the transaction of trade and commerce and includes any claim relating to: (a) a
business document or contract, (b) the export or import of goods, (c) the
carriage of goods by land, sea, air or pipeline, (d) the exploitation of oil
and gas reserves or other natural resources, (e) insurance and re-insurance,
(f) banking and financial services, (g) the operation of markets and exchanges,
(h) the purchase and sale of commodities, (i) the construction of ships, (j)
business agency, and (k) arbitration.”<o:p></o:p>This
definition together with many of the procedures of UK’s Commercial Court were
adopted by Lord Woolf in his Access for
Justice, Final Report, 1996. Lord Woolf’s blueprint for reform of civil
litigation in general has found its way into the Civil Procedure Rules 1998.<o:p></o:p>It
appears Ghana’s Rules Committee also took inspiration from r 58.1(2) of Civil
Procedure Rules, 1998. Order 58 rule 2 of CI 47 defines the nature of
commercial claim as:<o:p></o:p>“2. A commercial claim is
any claim arising out of trade and commerce and includes any claim relating
to:- <o:p></o:p>i. The formation or
governance of a business or commercial organization. <o:p></o:p>ii. The winding up or
bankruptcy of a Commercial or business or commercial organization or corporate
person. <o:p></o:p>iii. The restructuring or
payment of commercial debts by or to business or commercial organization or
person.<o:p></o:p>iv. A business document or
contract. <o:p></o:p>v. The export or import of
goods. <o:p></o:p>vi. The carriage of goods by
sea, air, land or pipeline. <o:p></o:p>vii. The exploration of oil
and gas reserves.<o:p></o:p>viii. Insurance and
re-insurance. <o:p></o:p>ix. Banking and financial
services <o:p></o:p>x. Business ag</main>