ACCESS BANK GH LTD vs. MARKET DIRECT AND OTHERS [2018]DLHC3459

Date	2018-04-21
Suit No.	SUIT NO. CM/0048/16
Citation No.	[2018]DLHC3459

GEORGE K. KOOMSON JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

PLAINTIFF REPRESENTED BY BERNARD GADZEKPO DEFENDANTS ABSENT

RESPONDENT REPRESENTED BY KINGSFORD ARTHUR (WITH MRS. MIRIAM AMOAKO)

KOJO ASARE BOATENG FOR SAMUEL CODJOE FOR 1ST 2ND 3RD 4TH 6TH & 7TH DEFENDANTS

EMMA OWUSU NIMAKO FOR CHRISTOPHER AKRASI FOR 5TH 8TH & 9TH DEFENDANTS

[2018]DLHC3459
																																						<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" >ACCESS BANK GH LTD<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MARKET DIRECT AND OTHERS<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL
DIVISION), ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>SUIT NO. CM/0048/16&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;12TH APRIL, 2018<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>PLAINTIFF REPRESENTED BY BERNARD GADZEKPO <o:p></o:p>DEFENDANTS ABSENT <o:p></o:p>RESPONDENT REPRESENTED BY KINGSFORD ARTHUR (WITH MRS. MIRIAM
AMOAKO) <o:p></o:p>KOJO ASARE BOATENG FOR SAMUEL CODJOE FOR 1ST, 2ND,
3RD, 4TH 6TH &amp; 7TH DEFENDANTS <o:p></o:p>EMMA OWUSU NIMAKO FOR CHRISTOPHER AKRASI FOR 5TH 8TH
&amp; 9TH DEFENDANTS <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>

<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">

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

</div>I have examined the application and the affidavit in support and
in opposition with all the attachments. I have listened to both counsel for and
in opposition to the application. I have given consideration to the Order of
the Court appointing the Respondents as Receivers/Managers. Regard has also
been given to the Order 27 of C.I. 47. It is my considered view that, the
respondents cannot purport to use the issue of tax and the debonding of the
warehouse as a basis to undermine the lawful Orders of this Court. Respondents
should note that their power to deal with these properties lies in the order
appointing them as Receivers/Managers. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In that regard, Respondents should be fully aware that a violation
of any part of this order constitutes contempt of the court. It is therefore my
opinion that, having completed the management of the properties of the 4th
Defendant, the Respondents are mandated to file their final accounts,
verified with an affidavit. In respect of the other Defendants, the Respondents
should further note that the order appointing them mandated them to file
quarterly accounts which are to be verified by an affidavit. I find it rather
embarrassing for respondents, with the kind of pedigree they have, to inform
the court that they forgot to file an affidavit verifying the facts in the
accounts that they filed. <o:p></o:p>Accordingly, the Respondents are hereby ordered to file all
quarterly outstanding accounts from the date of their appointment to date.
These accounts should be verified. It is further ordered that the Respondents
file final accounts in respect of 4th Defendant verified by an
affidavit within 14 days. The quarterly accounts should also be filed within 14
days. Case is adjourned to 16th May, 2018 at 10:00am. <o:p></o:p>

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