SWEDEN GHANA MEDICAL CENTRE LTD. vs. DR. HENRY BRONI-AMPONSAH & OTHERS [2020]DLHC10339

Date	2020-01-14
Suit No.	SUIT NO. LD/0007/2020
Citation No.	[2020]DLHC10339

HER LADYSHIP ANANDA J. AIKINS (MRS).

MR. J. OPOKU AGYEI BEING LED BY SAMUEL Y. BEKOE

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF PRESENT

DAVID KUDOADZI COUNSEL FOR THE 2ND DEFENDANT/APPLICANT PRESENT

[2020]DLHC10339
																																						<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" >SWEDEN
GHANA MEDICAL CENTRE LTD.<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>DR.
HENRY BRONI-AMPONSAH &amp; OTHERS<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS)<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;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;mso-pagination:none;tab-stops:36.0pt 72.0pt 108.0pt 144.0pt 180.0pt 216.0pt 252.0pt 311.5pt;
mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">SUIT NO.
LD/0007/2020&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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:
14TH JANUARY, 2020<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR. J. OPOKU AGYEI
BEING LED BY SAMUEL Y. BEKOE, COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF 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;">

DAVID
KUDOADZI, COUNSEL FOR THE 2ND DEFENDANT/APPLICANT PRESENT <o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none;
border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;
mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">HER LADYSHIP ANANDA J. AIKINS (MRS).<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-bidi-font-family:
&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">RULING ON APPLICATION TO SET
ASIDE THE WRIT OF SUMMONS AS AGAINST THE 2ND DFENDANT<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;
line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US">&nbsp;<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-bidi-font-family:
&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">This present application is
brought by the 2nd defendant herein under Order 11 rule 18 (1) (b)
and (d) of the High Court Rules, 2004 (CI 47) and it is a request for the writ
of summons and statement of claim to be set aside as against the 2nd
defendant on the ground that these proceedings are an abuse of the Court
process. The plaintiff is obviously opposed to the application. <o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-bidi-font-family:
&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">I have read the motion paper and
supporting affidavit plus the annexure filed by the 2nd defendant
and I have also carefully perused the affidavit in opposition filed by the
plaintiff. I have also considered the submissions made by both Counsel and
adverted my mind to Order 11 rule 18 (1) (b) and (d) and I am of the opinion
that the present application is to be granted because the plaintiff does not
deny the fact that there is already in existence a suit in the land division
between it and the 2nd defendant herein. The said suit is titled
“Agricattle Lakeside Estate Ltd. V. Dr. Henry Broni Amponsah and 2) Sweden
Ghana Medical Centre Ltd. with suit no LD/0154/2017.<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-bidi-font-family:
&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Indeed paragraphs 4 and 5 of the
supporting affidavit filed by the 2nd defendant show that the
plaintiff herein has counterclaimed for certain reliefs against the 2nd
defendant who is the plaintiff in the said suit. The reliefs being sought by
the plaintiff in the said counterclaim are virtually the same as the reliefs
that the plaintiff is seeking in this instant suit against the 2nd
defendant. I am therefore of the opinion that this present suit against the 2nd
defendant is just frivolous and an abuse of the Court process and it ought not
to be encouraged. <o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-bidi-font-family:
&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">The reason canvassed by the
plaintiff that the reliefs it seeks against the 2nd defendant in
this substantive suit cannot be conveniently tried in suit no
LD/0154/2017 does not sit well with this Court and will not be countenanced.<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-bidi-font-family:
&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">In the light of the above the
Court strikes out the writ and statement of claim as against the 2nd
defendant. There is no award of cost against the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;
line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US">(SGD)<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;
line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US">JUSTICE ANANDA J. AIKINS (MRS)<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;
line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US">JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;