JOSE M. CARBALLAL vs. JELCEM CO. LTD. [2019]DLHC10288

Date	2019-01-11
Suit No.	SUIT NO. IL/010/2019
Citation No.	[2019]DLHC10288

HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE ANANDA J. AIKINS (MRS).

DEFENDANT REPRESENTED BY PIUS OSOKPOR ABSENT

EDINA LOUISA AKULIGA

COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT PRESENT

ALBERT ADARY

COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPLICANT PRESENT

[2019]DLHC10288
																																						<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" >JOSE M. CARBALLAL<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>JELCEM CO. LTD.<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:
none;text-autospace:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">SUIT NO. IL/010/2019&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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:
11TH JANUARY
2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&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>PLAINTIFF ABSENT<o:p></o:p>DEFENDANT REPRESENTED BY PIUS
OSOKPOR ABSENT<o:p></o:p>EDINA LOUISA AKULIGA, COUNSEL
FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT PRESENT<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:115%;tab-stops:120.4pt;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">ALBERT
ADARY, COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPLICANT PRESENT<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;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:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;The defendant/applicant, per this
application, is requesting the Court to set aside the plaintiff’s Writ of
Summons and Statement of Claim on the grounds that same were not signed and as
such are a nullity since they have not met the requirement of the law as provided
in Order 2 rule 7 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2004 (CI 47).<o:p></o:p>The plaintiff/respondent has opposed
this request, saying that it was only the copies of the Writ of Summons and
Statement of Claim which were served on the defendant/applicant which were not
signed, and that the plaintiff/respondent’s counsel took steps to rectify same
by causing copies of the signed Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim to be
served on the defendant/applicant a second time.<o:p></o:p>I have perused the record and also
considered the submissions of both counsel and I note that the Writ of Summons
and Statement of Claim on the Court’s docket are both duly signed and sealed.
This duly satisfies the requirements of the law under Order 2 rule 7 of CI 47.<o:p></o:p>However since the counsel for the
defendant/applicant in his oral submissions showed to the Court an unsigned
Writ and Statement of Claim, this Court exercises its discretion under Order 81
rule 1, sub rule 2 (b) and orders that the unsigned Writ of Summons and
Statement of Claim which were served on the defendant/applicant should be
withdrawn and then certified copies of the signed Writ and Statement of Claim
which are on the Court’s docket be served on the defendant/applicant in the
interest of achieving a speedy and effective adjudication of this suit in
accordance with Order 1 rule 2 of CI 47.<o:p></o:p>In conclusion, it is this Court’s
opinion that the request to have the Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim set
aside on the ground of nullity should not be granted and same is refused.<o:p></o:p>The defendant/applicant is however
awarded cost in the sum of GH₵800.00 against the
plaintiff/respondent. The certified copy of the signed Writ is to be served on
defendant within one week of this order.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;(SGD)<o:p></o:p>