ALVARO QUAO vs. DAVID KOBIA [2020]DLHC10401

Date	2020-06-04
Suit No.	SUIT NO LD 0485/2019
Citation No.	[2020]DLHC10401

HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE ELLEN VIVIAN AMOAH

[2020]DLHC10401
																																						<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" >ALVARO QUAO<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>DAVID KOBIA<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<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;">

SUIT
NO LD 0485/2019&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;DATE: 4TH JUNE
2020<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE ELLEN VIVIAN AMOAH<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%;
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>Applications for injunctions are very often seen as run of the
mill applications. However when one considers the genesis of the locus
classicus case of American Cynamide vrs Ethicon 1975 AC it is the case that
injunctions came to be granted in circumstances where the legal remedies were
inadequate, in- complete, or wholly wanting, there equity created new remedies
to prevent the perpetuation of wrongs and injustice especially in circumstances
where no efficient remedy lies.<o:p></o:p>It is a core function of the
administration of justice to &nbsp;be
malleable in accordance with prevailing times. This view is re-echoed in the
case of Taylor v. Salmon 2 (I838) 4
Mvlne &amp; Cr. iu. where Lord
Cottenham stated thus:-<o:p></o:p>" It is the duty of a
court of equity………… to adapt its practice and course of proceedings, as far as
possible, to the existing state of society, and to apply its jurisdiction to
all those new cases which, from the progress daily made in the affairs of men,
must continually arise, and not, from too strict an adherence to forms and
rules established under very different circumstances, decline to administer
justice and to enforce rights for which there is no other remedy."<o:p></o:p>In fact this is captured in the latin
maxim “ Ubi jus ibi remedium”<o:p></o:p>What therefore brings Plaintiff to apply for this
interlocutory injunction?<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff/applicant issued a writ of summons on the&nbsp; 26th February, 2019 claiming the
reliefs as endorsed on the writ of summons. This action is a &nbsp;“ a real action “ distinguished from a
“possessory action” at law. It is the Plaintiff’s case that by a consent
judgment by an&nbsp; Accra High Court dated
the 12th July, 2001 in suit no. L353/97 the La Stool, leleshie
quarter and Nmati quarter all of La agreed to create a trust to take over and
manage the land in dispute for the benefit of the La citizens.&nbsp; Plaintiff attached exhibit SA1 to show this. Plaintiff
goes on to say that in furtherance to that a trust deed was incorporated under Act 106 of 1962 which they attached as
Exhibit SA2.<o:p></o:p>The crux of the
Plaintiff’s case is that &nbsp;the Trust then
applied and obtained land certificate which is exhibit SA3, no. GA19310 dated 2nd
October, 2003 covering the said land, and that &nbsp;in or around 2007 the applicant before this
court had a grant from the Trust which she also registered as no. GA25541 volume
2 folio 643 dated 3rd January, 2008 which has also been attached as
exhibit SA4.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The plaintiff applicant before the court took
immediate possession of land and had remained in effective possession without
let or hindrance until the respondent trespass on sale.<o:p></o:p>Plaintiff/applicant
has attached pictures showing the development at the time the application was
made, they are exhibit 5A and exhibit 5B series.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;On the 25th March, 2019 the
respondent filed an affidavit in opposition. <o:p></o:p>The&nbsp; Respondent’s &nbsp;case is that they had the land in April, 2018.&nbsp; &nbsp;The
court has has sight of&nbsp; exhibit DK1 as
Defendant’s lease and exhibit DK2 as a search result conducted by the Defendant.
The search result attached to the affidavit in opposition stated that the land
was ;<o:p></o:p><ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="a">
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:12.0pt;margin-bottom:10.0pt;text-align:
 justify;line-height:115%;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">Not a state land <o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:12.0pt;margin-bottom:10.0pt;text-align:
 justify;line-height:115%;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">&nbsp;It recorded an Agreement dated 10th
 April, 2002 from the La Stool, the Leleshie quarter and the Nmati quarter
 of La to East DadeKotopon development Trust.<o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>This search is
what it is. On the face of it appearing to&nbsp;
record /corroborate the Plaintiff’s position.(as seen in Plaintiff’s
exhibit SA2 which is the Trust deed.)<o:p></o:p>Let me at this
juncture dive quickly into the law to say that on the authority of Vanderpuye v Nartey 1975 &nbsp;GLR &nbsp;I am aware that a court cannot comment on
factual matters in such an application –so I am thus restraining myself.<o:p></o:p>The
Plaintiff/applicant then filed a supplementary affidavit in support on the 9th
April, 2019 to respond to exhibit DK1 and DK2 attached to the affidavit in
opposition of the respondent. <o:p></o:p>