ADWOA HARRIS WIAFE AND JEMIMA PRAH vs. EMMANUEL SARFO WIAFE AND THE DEPUTY SHERIFF [2019]DLHC8942

ADWOA HARRIS WIAFE AND JEMIMA PRAH vs. EMMANUEL SARFO WIAFE AND THE DEPUTY SHE... [2019]DLHC8942

Date	2019-11-29
Suit No.	SUIT NO. GJ/245/2019
Citation No.	[2019]DLHC8942

AGYABENG G. AKRASI ESQ. OF AGYABENG AKRASI & CO DANQUAH CIRCLE OSU ACCRA

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS.

JUSTICE ABDULAI ESQ. OF CROWN LEGAL BUREAU WEST LEGON ACCRA

COUNSEL FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/APPLICANT.

[2019]DLHC8942
																																						<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" >ADWOA HARRIS WIAFE AND JEMIMA PRAH<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>EMMANUEL SARFO WIAFE (1STDEFENDANT/APPLICANT) AND THE DEPUTY SHERIFF (DEFENDANT)<o:p></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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">SUIT NO. GJ/245/2019&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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:
29TH NOVEMBER, 2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>AGYABENG G. AKRASI ESQ. OF AGYABENG AKRASI
&amp; CO DANQUAH CIRCLE OSU ACCRA, COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS.<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;margin-left:0cm;margin-right:-36.0pt">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;tab-stops:298.8pt;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUSTICE ABDULAI ESQ., OF CROWN LEGAL
BUREAU, WEST LEGON, ACCRA, COUNSEL FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HER LADYSHIP
JUSTICE JENNIFER ABENA DADZIE<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><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Before me today is a motion on notice,
application for interlocutory injunction filed by the Plaintiffs/Applicants (“Applicants”),
praying for an order restraining the Defendants/Respondents, their agents,
servants and assigns, whosoever from selling, auctioning or causing to be
auctioned Plot No. 9, Beijing Street, East Legon or taking any step(s) in any
way towards the sale or auction of the named property, pending the final
determination of the suit.&nbsp; The
Applicants also pray for a further order of mandatory injunction or order
compelling the 1st Defendant, his agents, servants, and assigns
whosoever to vacate the subject matter property, and for the 2nd
Defendant to restore Plaintiffs into occupation and possession thereof.<o:p></o:p>I
have reviewed the application and considered the affidavits in support and in
opposition to same as well as the evidence placed before the court.&nbsp; I have given great thought to the rules of
procedure, that is, Order 25 of the C. I 47 and case law that govern the grant
or otherwise of an application such as this, to include Punjabi Brothers v. Namih
(1958) 3 WAL 381, and American
Cyanamid Co. Ltd v. Ethicon Ltd. (1985) AC 396, which was adopted and
applied with approval in the case of Vanderpuye v Nartey (1977) GLR 428 at
431. <o:p></o:p>In effect, the applicable law to the
grant or refusal of an application for interim injunction is that the Applicant
must, prima facie demonstrate a legal right that is in danger of continuous
threat if the status quo ante was not maintained. Also, the Applicant shall
demonstrate that on the balance of convenience irreparable damage shall be
caused to him or her if that legal right was not protected for the time being. <o:p></o:p>As a discretionary and equitable order,
the court has an absolute discretion either to grant or refuse an interlocutory
injunction. I also share the view that in matters where the Court is exercising
discretion there is no binding precedent. The Court looks at the peculiar
circumstances of each case and determines the appropriate course. This is
because each case has to be determined on its own merits although it is equally
true to say that the court may take into account general established legal
reasons or principles as stated above.<o:p></o:p>In the present application, I find that it is
one that is anchored in history as has been recounted in the Respondent’s
affidavit in opposition and supported by all the exhibits attached thereto in
the following terms:<o:p></o:p>“6.
The 1st Plaintiff/Applicant filed a notice of appeal against the
judgment referred to supra on 30th January, 2015, just about two
months upon the delivery of the judgment, and obtained a stay of execution to
freeze the hands of the 1st Defendant/Respondent herein from
continuing with the execution of the stay of execution marked Exhibit “ESW”. <o:p></o:p>7. The
1st Defendant/Respondent thereafter did nothing in pursuance of the
appeal, therefore 1st Defendant/Applicant brought an application for
want of prosecution which was granted by the Honourable Court.&nbsp; Attached is a copy of the said ruling marked
Exhibit “ESW1”.<o:p></o:p>