LAWRENCE EKOW KWOFIE, SUING PER HIS LAWFUL ATTORNEY FLORENCE ADDO vs. ALHAJI ADAMS SAMIRAH, KARL NORTE DUA, MAHMOUD RASAAC AND AWAL ALHASSAN [2019]DLHC8969

LAWRENCE EKOW KWOFIE, SUING PER HIS LAWFUL ATTORNEY FLORENCE ADDO vs. ALHAJI AD... [2019]DLHC8969

Date	2019-10-10
Suit No.	SUIT N0. LD/0001/2019
Citation No.	[2019]DLHC8969

BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE E. K. BOSOMPEM APENKWAH J.

NANA OWUSU ANKOMAH FOR PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT PRESENT

KOFI BEKOE HOLDING BRIEF FOR FIIFI ABBAM FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT

[2019]DLHC8969
																																						<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" >LAWRENCE EKOW KWOFIE,
SUING PER HIS LAWFUL ATTORNEY FLORENCE ADDO<o:p></o:p>

(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>

vs.<o:p></o:p>

ALHAJI ADAMS SAMIRAH, KARL
NORTE DUA, MAHMOUD RASAAC AND AWAL ALHASSAN<o:p></o:p>

(DEFENDANTS)<o:p></o:p>

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

[HIGH COURT (LAND DIVISION 5), ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>

SUIT
N0.&nbsp; LD/0001/2019&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;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;DATE:
10TH OCTOBER, 2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>

COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>

NANA OWUSU ANKOMAH FOR
PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT PRESENT<o:p></o:p>

KOFI
BEKOE HOLDING BRIEF FOR FIIFI ABBAM FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>

CORAM:<o:p></o:p>

BEFORE
HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE E. K. BOSOMPEM APENKWAH J.<o:p></o:p>

</div>

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

</div>

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

BY COURT:<o:p></o:p>

This is an
application for interlocutory injunction brought by the Plaintiff. Application is
brought&nbsp;&nbsp; under order 25 rule (1) of C.I
47. By Order 25 rule (6) this court can make a determination on the basis of
the papers filed. I therefore make a determination on the basis of the
affidavit and exhibits filed as well as a look at the pleadings. In case of 18th
July Ltd vrs. Yehans International Ltd (2012) 1 SCGLR 167 at holding (2) the
Supreme Court held as follows:<o:p></o:p>

<span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">(1)&nbsp;&nbsp; Consider
whether the case of an applicant was not frivolous and had demonstrated that he
had legal or equitable right which a court should protect.<o:p></o:p>

<span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">(2)&nbsp;&nbsp; Ensue that
the status quo was maintained so as to avoid any irreparable&nbsp; damage to the&nbsp;
applicant pending the hearing of the matter and <o:p></o:p>

<span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">(3)&nbsp;&nbsp; Consider the
balance of convenience and should refuse the application if its grant would
cause serious hardship to the other party” See also the case of Welford Quarcoo
vrs.&nbsp; Attorney-General and anor (2012)
1SCGLR. In the instant case it seems to me the Plaintiff/Applicant has a
case&nbsp;&nbsp; which is not frivolous, and that
the action raises triable issues. However, from the affidavits before the court
the 1st Defendant/Respondent has already put up building on the
disputed land which is almost ready for habitation. <o:p></o:p>

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