AFRICAN AUTOMOBILE vs. ACCRA METROPOLITAN ASSEMBLY [2018]DLHC3462

Date	2018-05-09
Suit No.	SUIT NO. RPC/344/2007
Citation No.	[2018]DLHC3462

GEORGE K. KOOMSON JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

AKAWARI ATINDEM FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT

SOWAH CHARWAY FOR SARFO BUABENG FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

[2018]DLHC3462
																																						<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" >AFRICAN AUTOMOBILE<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ACCRA METROPOLITAN
ASSEMBLY<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL
DIVISION), ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>SUIT NO. RPC/344/2007&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 9TH MAY, 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>AKAWARI ATINDEM FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT <o:p></o:p>SOWAH CHARWAY FOR SARFO BUABENG FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT <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>&nbsp;This is an
application for stay of execution filed by the
Defendant/Judgment/Debtor/Applicant. I have read the application and the supporting
affidavits. I have also read the affidavit in opposition. Regard has been given
to the principles governing the grant or otherwise of applications of this
nature. <o:p></o:p>It is noted that the court ordered both counsel to file their
written submissions. None of them has complied. The court however finds it
necessary to determine the application without the submissions of the lawyers
as they have both shown that they do not want to address me. <o:p></o:p>After examining the affidavit filed by the Defendant/Applicant, I
find no merit in the application. The judgment upon which the
Defendant/Applicant has lodged the appeal which also forms the basis of the
application has been found to be fraudulent. It is therefore my view that any
purported act based on the said fraudulent judgment is void. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Again, the claim by the Defendant/Applicant that the Defendant
shall suffer hardship is untenable. In my view, the Defendant/Applicant having
benefited from the services provided by the Plaintiff/Respondent cannot turn
round to be talking about hardship. Rather, the non-payment of the
Defendant/Applicant for the services which the Plaintiff/Respondent gave to
them all these years is working hardship on the Plaintiff. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Furthermore, the Plaintiff/Respondent is a reputable company
dealing in the repairs and sale of vehicles and are capable of refunding, in
the event the Defendant wins the appeal, any money paid to it in accordance
with the judgment. For the following reasons I refuse the application for stay
of execution. The application is dismissed. <o:p></o:p>I make no order as to costs. <o:p></o:p>

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