K. OGUNS LIMITED LTD vs. GLO MOBILE GHANA LTD & ANO. [2019]DLHC10418

Date	2019-05-16
Suit No.	SUIT NO.: GJ/671/2019
Citation No.	[2019]DLHC10418

HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE ELLEN VIVIAN AMOAH

A.T. TAMAKLOE FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT PRESENT

JUSTICE SALLAH FOR THE DEFENDANTS/APPLICANT – PRESENT

[2019]DLHC10418
																																						<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" >K. OGUNS LIMITED LTD<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>GLO MOBILE GHANA LTD &amp; ANO.<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;">

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>A.T. TAMAKLOE 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="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:108.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:
-108.0pt;line-height:115%;tab-stops:4.5pt;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUSTICE
SALLAH FOR THE DEFENDANTS/APPLICANT – PRESENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE ELLEN VIVIAN AMOAH<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%;
tab-stops:4.5pt;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;This is a ruling
pursuant to Order 41 r 8 of C.I 47. The applicant seeks the Court’s favourable
exercise of its discretion for an order staying the execution of the judgment
this Court dated the 9th of April 2019 and for an order to pay the
judgment debt by instalment. C.I 47 entitles a victorious Judgment creditor to
enforce judgment for the payment of money in accordance with the rules. The
rules equally allow the Court to exercise its discretion to order payment by instalment
and to stay the execution of judgment. <o:p></o:p>Order 41 rule 8 of
C.I 47 provides that Where any judgment or order directs the payment of money,
the Court may, for any sufficient reason, order that the amount shall be paid
by instalments, with or without interest; and the order may be made at the time
of giving the judgment, or at any time afterwards by the same or any other
Judge and may be rescinded upon specific cause shown at any time. The order for
payment by instalment pursuant to Order 41 r 8 of C.I 47 effectively stays the
execution of judgment.<o:p></o:p>The exercise of
this power is entirely at the discretion of the Court. And as with all
discretionary powers, the Supreme court in Ecobank Ghana Limited
Vrs Aluminium Enterprise Ltd; Civil Appeal&nbsp;
No. J7/5/2015 dated&nbsp; 23rd
March, 2017 has stated that; “The
exercise of every discretion must have a basis, factual and/or legal, to
sustain it, lest it should assume the character of arbitrariness, which is
deprecated by article 296 of the 1992 Constitution.” &nbsp;Article 296 of the 1992 Constitution requires
that discretion must be exercised judicially and judiciously. That is to say
with correct and convincing reasons. The exercise of this discretion calls for
the Court to consider the rules governing the issue and not to act arbitrarily
or as the Court likes. <o:p></o:p>Order 41 rule 8
requires that sufficient reason be provided as basis for an order for payment
by instalment. It is necessary for the applicant, therefore, to fully convince
the court of the special circumstances that make prompt and expeditious payment
of the judgment debt inexpedient thus requiring the reprieve of payment by
instalment.<o:p></o:p>The Applicant
other than proposing a payment schedule has not demonstrated their financial
position to enable the Court ascertain whether or not the proposed schedule is
reasonable. It is trite law that unless there are good, sufficient and adequate
reasons, a judgment debtor should be allowed to enjoy the fruits of the
judgment. <o:p></o:p>The courts cannot
be used as a pawn in a Judgment debtor’s strategy to delay payment of a
judgment debt unreasonably.<o:p></o:p>Again with regard
to stay of executions generally, the Court’s posture is stated succinctly in
the case of Nana Kwasi Agyeman Vii And Others V. Nana Hima Dekyi Xiii And
Others [1982-83] GLR 453-463 &nbsp;“That a court should not stay execution
unless there are exceptional circumstances warranting a stay because it is well
established that a successful litigant should not be deprived of the fruits of
his victory”<o:p></o:p>In the present
case, the Court has looked at all the affidavits in support of the application
and listened to the submissions of Counsel for the Applicant and has not been
able to find any good reason for depriving the respondent of the fruits of
their judgment. <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;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(SGD)<o:p></o:p>H/L.
ELLEN VIVIAN AMOAH<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; JUSTICE
OF THE HIGH COURT<o:p></o:p>