AMANSIE WEST RURAL BANK LIMITED vs. BROOKS ASSET MANAGEMENT LIMITED & 6 ORS. [2018]DLHC3718

Date	2018-01-29
Suit No.	SUIT NO.BFS/04/18
Citation No.	[2018]DLHC3718

P ANGELINA MENSAH-HOMIAH (MRS.) JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

SULLEY SAMBIAN FOR PLAINTIFF

NII OMAN BADOO FOR 7TH DEFENDANT

[2018]DLHC3718
																																						<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" >AMANSIE WEST RURAL BANK
LIMITED<o:p></o:p>&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;vs.&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; <o:p></o:p>BROOKS ASSET MANAGEMENT
LIMITED &amp; 6 ORS.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL
DIVISION), KUMASI]<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">

SUIT NO.BFS/04/18&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE: 29TH JANUARY, 2018<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>SULLEY SAMBIAN FOR
PLAINTIFF<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">

NII
OMAN BADOO FOR 7TH DEFENDANT<o:p></o:p>

P
ANGELINA MENSAH-HOMIAH (MRS.) JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT<o:p></o:p>

RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>The
Securities and Exchange Commission, the Applicant herein, per its lawyer moves
the court as follows:<o:p></o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That the jurisdiction of this Honourable
Court has been improperly invoked under the High Court Civil Procedure) Rules,
2004 (C.I.47) as amended.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That the Suit/Action is premature as the
mandatory or domestic remedies provided under the Securities Industries Act, 2016 (Act 929) (hereinafter called the
‘SIL’) have not been complied with by the Plaintiffs.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That this suit is an abuse of this
Honourable court’s process and vexatious. <o:p></o:p>The
gravamen of the application is that the Respondent has not exhausted the
mandatory local remedies provided under&nbsp;&nbsp;
Act 929 and therefore this court’s jurisdiction has not been properly
invoked. It has been argued by counsel for the applicant that the Plaintiff’s
case falls within the purview and legal mandate of the Commission. And, the
Commission has rules which require that “a complaint, dispute or any violation
arising under this Act shall before any redress is sought in the Courts, be
submitted to the Commission for hearing and determination in accordance with
this Act.” <o:p></o:p>Counsel
for the 7th Defendant/Applicant in his written submissions cited and
relied on several authorities in which the courts have ruled that the domestic
remedies are to be exhausted prior to instituting an action in court. I will
highlight the case of The Republic v High Court (Commercial
Division)
Accra, Ex parte Republic Bank Limited ;HFC Bank (Ghana) Limited &amp;
Securities and Exchange&nbsp; Commission
(Interested parties) Unreported Civil Motion No. JS/45/2014 17th
December, 2014, per Atuguba JSC. <o:p></o:p>As
to be expected, the Plaintiff/Respondent vehemently opposed the application.
The grounds are contained in affidavit in opposition filed on 15/12/17. In sum,
the Plaintiff/Respondent’s contention is that before this suit was initiated,
it wrote to the 7th Defendant/Applicant complaining about the action
of the 1st Defendant, a copy of that letter was attached as exhibit
‘MB.’ This was followed up by a letter from the Plaintiff’s solicitor a month
later, yet the 7th Defendant turned a blind eye to its complaints.
Another contention is that since the 7th Defendant is a party to
this suit, there is a likelihood of bias if the case is referred to them for
investigation, and, it cann</main>