THERESAH NUAMAH vs. FIRST ATLANTIC BANK LTD [2018]DLHC9316

Date	2018-03-19
Suit No.	SUIT NO. BFS 08/2018
Citation No.	[2018]DLHC9316

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE

ELVIS OFORI ASANTE FOR THE APPLICANTS

AKUA POKUAAK WARTENG FOR THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

[2018]DLHC9316
																																						<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" >THERESAH
NUAMAH<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>FIRST
ATLANTIC BANK LTD<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, KUMASI]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:normal;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">SUIT NO. BFS 08/2018&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 19TH MARCH, 2018<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>ELVIS
OFORI ASANTE FOR THE APPLICANTS<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:normal;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">AKUA POKUAAK WARTENG FOR THE
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HIS
LORDSHIP JUSTICE DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE<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 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

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

</div>This is an application to strike out the
names and claims against the 1st and 2nd Defendants to
the counterclaim who are the applicants herein.<o:p></o:p>It
is the contention of the applicants that the Defendant/Respondent herein ought
to have sought leave of the court before joining the applicants herein to the
suit as 1st and 2nd defendants to the counterclaim.
Counsel submitted that no party on its own can join another party to a suit.
Counsel acknowledges that a defendant to counterclaim is known to the rules of
court per Order 12 rule 5 (1) of CI 47. He, however, submitted that the word
“join” should be construed under Order 4 rule 5 (2) which makes it mandatory
for a party to seek leave of the court before joining another party to a suit.
He invited the court to strike out the names of the applicants from the suit.<o:p></o:p>The
Defendant/Respondent is opposed to the application. It was submitted by counsel
for the respondent that the application is misconceived and same must be
dismissed. Counsel argued that Order 12 rule 5 governs the joinder of
defendants to counter-claim and that nowhere in Order 12 rule 5 is it stated
that the defendant ought to join the defendants to counter-claim by an
application. She submitted that Order 4 rule 5 (2) is not applicable in this
case. She submitted further that Order 12 rule 5 is in advancement of the
principle of the court to have expeditious trials so that instead of the
traditional way of joining parties to an action a defendant who has a
counterclaim and is desirous of having the matter tried expeditiously can
invoke the rule. This, according to counsel is in tandem with Order 1 rule 1
(2) of CI 47.<o:p></o:p>Order
4 rule 5 (2) of CI 47 makes provision for joinder of parties in general as follows:<o:p></o:p>“(2) At any stage of
proceedings the Court may on such terms as it thinks just either of its own
motion or on application <o:p></o:p>(a) order any person who has
been improperly or unnecessarily made a party or who for any reason is no
longer a party or a necessary party to cease to be a party; <o:p></o:p>(b) order any person who
ought to have been joined as a party or whose presence before the Court is
necessary to ensure that all matters in dispute in the proceedings are
effectively and completely determined and adjudicated upon to be added as a
party.”<o:p></o:p>It
is clear from the provision that it is the court which determines whether a
person should be joined to an action or not. The courts are clothed with the
jurisdiction to join a party whose presence is necessary for the determination
of the issues in dispute. Thus, in Gurtner v Circuit and Another [1968] 2 QB
587 at 595, Denning MR stated:<o:p></o:p>“When two parties are in
dispute in an action at law and the determination of the dispute will directly
affect a third person in his legal rights or in his pocket, in that he will be
bound to foot the bill, then the court in its discretion may allow him to be
added as a party on such terms as it thinks fit.”<o:p></o:p>The
Ghanaian courts have applied this principle on joinder in numerous cases
including Sai v Tsuru III [2010] SCGLR 762 and Sam v Attorney General [2000]
SCGLR 102.<o:p></o:p>It
is, however, provided under Order 12 rule 5 (1) of the High Court (Civil
Procedure) Rules, 2004 (CI 47) as follows:<o:p></o:p>“Where a defendant who makes
a counterclaim against the plaintiff alleges that any other person, whether a party
to the action or not, is liable to the defendant together with the plaintiff in
respect of the subject-matter of the counterclaim; or claims against such other
person any relief relating to or connected with the original subject-matter of
the action, the defendant may join that other person as a party against whom
the counterclaim is made.”<o:p></o:p>Order
12 rule 5(2) of CI 47 provides:<o:p></o:p>“Where a defendant joins a
person as a party against whom the defendant makes a counterclaim, the
defendant shall add that person's name to the title of the action and serve
that person a copy of the counterclaim.”<o:p></o:p>It
is also provided under Order 12 rule 5(7) of CI 47 that:<o:p></o:p>