GIFTLOVE OSEI ALIAS GIFTLOVE AWUAH vs. ADVANCE GHANA SAVINGS AND LOANS LTD [2019]DLHC9232

Date	2019-02-20
Suit No.	SUIT NO. RPC 34/2019
Citation No.	[2019]DLHC9232

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE

JOSEPHINE APPIAH FOR RUFINA ACQUAH FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT

SHADRACK YEBOAH OBENG FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

[2019]DLHC9232
																																						<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" >GIFTLOVE OSEI ALIAS GIFTLOVE AWUAH<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ADVANCE GHANA SAVINGS AND LOANS LTD<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION), KUMASI]<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.&nbsp; RPC 34/2019&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;DATE:
20TH FEBRUARY, 2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>JOSEPHINE APPIAH FOR RUFINA
ACQUAH FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT<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">

SHADRACK
YEBOAH OBENG FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT<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">

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE, HIGH COURT
JUDGE<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>In
this application, the defendant/applicant (hereinafter referred to as the
applicant) is praying the court to set aside the default judgment obtained
against it. The plaintiff/respondent (hereinafter referred to as the
respondent) never filed an affidavit in response to the motion. However,
counsel for the respondent made an oral submission on a point of law.<o:p></o:p>Counsel
for the respondent submitted among other things that the process before the
court is void because counsel does not have a valid license for the current
year as the license endorsed on the process covers only 2018. Counsel also
submitted that there is no chamber registration number endorsed on the process
and that affects the validity of the process as well.<o:p></o:p>It
is provided under section 8 (1) of the Legal Profession Act, 1960, Act 32 as
follows:<o:p></o:p>"A person, other than
the Attorney-General, or an officer of Attorney-General’s department, shall not
practice as a solicitor unless that person has in respect of that practice a
valid annual solicitor’s license issued by the Council duly stamped and in the
form set out in the Second Schedule."<o:p></o:p>In
the case of Henry Nuertey Korboe v Francis Amosa, unreported, Suit No.
J4/56/2014, Supreme Court, Accra 21/04/2016, the Supreme Court, by a majority
decision, affirmed its earlier ruling in Republic v High Court, Accra; Ex Parte
Teriwajah and Henry Nuertey Korboe (REISS &amp; CO GHANA LIMITED) (INTERESTED
PARTY) which also bothered on section 8(1) of the Legal Profession Act 1960
(Act 32). By that majority decision, a solicitor who is not qualified to
practice within a time frame is prohibited by section 8 of Act 32 to practice,
and any process filed without a license should not be given any effect in law.
In REPUBLIC v COURT OF APPEAL; EX-PARTE: DAKPEMA ZOBOGNAA &amp; Others (LANDS
COMMISSION – INTERESTED PARTY) – Unreported judgment of the Supreme Court dated
5th June 2018, the Supreme Court clarified the position of the law when it held
that the mere non-endorsement of a lawyer’s Solicitor’s license on the motion
paper did not render the application a nullity. For one to succeed on such a
point, he should establish that at the time the motion was prepared and filed
by counsel, he had no Solicitor’s license to practice as a lawyer.<o:p></o:p>On
the face of the motion, a 2018 solicitor’s license was endorsed on the motion by
counsel for the applicant. When same was challenged no response came from
counsel. This implies that counsel has conceded to the point and had no valid
license at the time the motion was filed. To the extent that counsel for the
applicant herein did not endorse a valid license number on the motion paper and
has not demonstrated that it had a valid license at the time the motion was
filed, the motion is incompetent.<o:p></o:p>Both
counsel made submissions relating to service of the writ and the validity of
the default judgment.&nbsp; I am however
unable to consider the arguments to determine the application on merit, in the
light of the conclusion that the application is incompetent.<o:p></o:p>The application is hereby
struck out as incompetent. There will be no order as to costs. <o:p></o:p>

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