JOSEPH GYAMFI APPIAGYEI (SUING PER HIS LAWFUL ATTORNEY FLORENCE DODOO) vs. OSAMANPA ESTATE DEVELOPERS LTD [2019]DLHC9021

JOSEPH GYAMFI APPIAGYEI (SUING PER HIS LAWFUL ATTORNEY FLORENCE DODOO) vs. OSAM... [2019]DLHC9021

Date	2019-05-21
Suit No.	SUIT NO. LD/0763/18
Citation No.	[2019]DLHC9021

HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE BARBARA TETTEH-CHARWAY (MRS)

PATIENCE ANKRAH WITH EFUA OHEMENG GYAN FOR PLAINTIFF

THOMAS HUGHES FOR DEFENDAN

[2019]DLHC9021
																																						<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" >JOSEPH GYAMFI APPIAGYEI
(SUING PER HIS LAWFUL ATTORNEY FLORENCE DODOO)<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>OSAMANPA ESTATE DEVELOPERS
LTD<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[HIGH COURT (LAND 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">

SUIT
NO. LD/0763/18&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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:
21ST MAY, 2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>PATIENCE ANKRAH WITH EFUA
OHEMENG GYAN FOR PLAINTIFF&nbsp;&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><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

THOMAS
HUGHES FOR DEFENDAN&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<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">

HER LADYSHIP
JUSTICE BARBARA TETTEH-CHARWAY (MRS)<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The preliminary legal question that
this Court is called upon to resolve is whether or not the Plaintiff’s action
is statute barred. The Limitation Act, 1972 (NRCD 54) is the applicable law and
is based on the principle that there must be an end to litigation. The
Limitation Act therefore sets time limits beyond which a party may not be
permitted to bring an action for certain reliefs.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>By raising the defence that the instant
action is statute barred under the Limitation Act, 1972 NRCD 54, an onus
reversal situation is created where the persuasive burden is shifted to the Plaintiff
herein to prove the contrary. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In the submissions filed by counsel for
Plaintiff he based the instant application on Section 4 of NRCD 54 which
provides that: <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>A
person shall not bring an action after the expiration of six (6) years from the
date on which the cause of action accrued, in the case of;<o:p></o:p>(a)&nbsp;&nbsp; an
action founded on tort other than an action to which sections 2 and 3 apply<o:p></o:p>(b)&nbsp; an
action founded on simple contract;<o:p></o:p>(c)&nbsp;&nbsp; an
action founded on quasi-contract; <o:p></o:p>(d)