GN BANK LTD (PLAINTIFF) vs. GANOYES SERVICES & 2 ORS (DEFENDANTS) [2018]DLHC7203

Date	2018-04-24
Suit No.	SUIT NO. CM/BFS/0103/17
Citation No.	[2018]DLHC7203

HIS LORDSHIP GEORGE K. KOOMSON (J).

CELESTINE AFI SAPPOR FOR DENNIS OFOSU APPIAH FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

ROLAND ATTA-KESSON HAMILTON FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT

[2018]DLHC7203
																																						<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" >GN BANK LTD<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>GANOYES
SERVICES &amp; 2 ORS<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS)<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">

SUIT
NO. CM/BFS/0103/17&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; DATE: 24TH APRIL, 2018<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL: <o:p></o:p>CELESTINE
AFI SAPPOR FOR DENNIS OFOSU APPIAH FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT<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">

ROLAND
ATTA-KESSON HAMILTON FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT<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>This is an application for an order for
transfer of suit to appropriate forum.&nbsp; I
have read the application and the affidavits filed by the parties.&nbsp; I have also listened to both counsel for and
in opposition to the application.&nbsp; Regard
has been given to Order 3 of C.I. 47, 2004.<o:p></o:p>There is no dispute that the Defendants
reside and carry on their business in Cape Coast.&nbsp; Although Plaintiff/Respondent is of the view
that the transaction which gave rise to the present action was executed in
Accra, I find the view of the Plaintiff/Respondent untenable as the application
for the facility was done at the Cape Coast Branch of the Bank where the 1st
Defendant has its accounts.&nbsp; The fact
that the approval of the facility was done at the headquarters of the bank in
Accra, does not mean that the transaction was executed in Accra.&nbsp; In any case, the intendment of Order 3 of
C.I. 47 rule 2 thereof is to prevent situations like this.&nbsp; That is to say, Order 3 rule 2 is to prevent
Plaintiff from inconveniencing parties they are suing by initiating actions anywhere
prefer.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>In my view, in so far as all the
Defendants reside in Cape Coast is even enough to justify the transfer of the
suit.&nbsp; Having found that the transaction
was also entered into in Cape Coast, I am of the considered opinion that this
is a proper case for the court to report its pendency to the Chief Justice for
transfer.&nbsp; Accordingly the suit is hereby
referred to the Chief Justice for transfer of same to Cape Coast High Court,
Commercial Division.<o:p></o:p>I
make no order as to costs.<o:p></o:p>

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