ENABLIS ENTERPRISE NETWORK (PLAINTIFF) vs. TULLOW GHANA LIMITED (DEFENDANT) [2018]DLHC7198

Date	2018-05-14
Suit No.	CM/BDC/0240/17
Citation No.	[2018]DLHC7198

HIS LORDSHIP GEORGE K. KOOMSON (J).

BENEDICT ASARE MORKLEY (WITH WINIFRED ODOI QUARSHIE) LED BY

ABDALLAH ALI NAKYEA FOR PLAINTIFF

VALARIE HILDA ATUWO FOR KIMATHI KUENYEHIA FOR DEFENDANT

[2018]DLHC7198
																																						<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" >ENABLIS ENTERPRISE
NETWORK<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>TULLOW GHANA LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION),
ACCRA]<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">

CM/BDC/0240/17&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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:
14TH MAY, 2018<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL: <o:p></o:p>BENEDICT ASARE MORKLEY
(WITH WINIFRED ODOI QUARSHIE) LED BY ABDALLAH ALI NAKYEA 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">

VALARIE
HILDA ATUWO FOR KIMATHI KUENYEHIA FOR DEFENDANT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HIS LORDSHIP GEORGE K.
KOOMSON (J).<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 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>In this action the Applicant has
applied to this court for an order compelling the Respondent to furnish
Applicant with further and better particulars of paragraph 55 of the Statement
of Defence and Counterclaim filed by the Respondent.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The Respondent resist the application
for further and better particulars on the grounds that the said paragraph 55 is
sufficiently detailed to inform the Applicant the basis of the allegation of
fraud.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The issue I have to resolve in this
application is whether or not the object of the information requested by the
Applicant for further and better particulars is to obtain particulars of the
facts narrated by the Respondent in its pleadings at paragraph 55 of the
statement of defence and counterclaim.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>I have read the application and the various
affidavits filed by the parties. I have also examined the pleadings filed by
the Respondent. I have given regard to the written submissions filed by both
parties. I have given thoughtful consideration to the principles governing
applications of this nature. Regard has also been given to the relevant
provisions of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 C.I. 47.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In defining the object of further and
better particulars, Archer J (as he then was) in the case of SAMPA v SACKER [1964] GLR 510-513,
quoted Cotton L.J. in SPEDDING v
FITZPATRICK (1888) 38 Ch. 410 as stating thus: <o:p></o:p>“The
object of particulars is to enable the party asking for them to know what case
he has to meet at the trial, and so to save unnecessary expense, and avoid
allowing parties to be taken by surprise….. The old system of pleading at
Common Law was to conceal as much as possible what was going to be proved at
the trial, but under the present system it is our duty to see that a party so
states his case that his opponent will not be taken by surprise.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In the latter case of WANYINARA v BASSAN [1972] 2 GLR 227, Edusei
J, stated that:<o:p></o:p>“The
whole purpose of pleading is to set out in a summary form his claim or defence
so that the opposite party is not taken by surprise at the trial. The opposite
party must come to court knowing the case he has to meet. It is on these
principles that further and better statement of particulars will be ordered by
this court.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Lartey J, summarized the object or
purpose of an application for particulars, in the case of QUANSAH v OFOSU [1991] 1 GLR 151 as follows:<o:p></o:p>“It
is trite law that particulars of any matter stated in any pleading may be
ordered by a court. The object or purpose of an application of particulars is
to enable the Applicant to know or have a forestate of the case</main>