THE REPUBLIC vs. NEWMONT GHANA GOLD LIMITED, THE MINISTER IN CHARGE OF MINES AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL EX PARTE: GABRIEL NSIAH ABABIO (NSAANA HENE), MAAME AKOSUA KOBI, MAAME ABIRI AND ABENA ATAA [2020]DLHC10646

THE REPUBLIC vs. NEWMONT GHANA GOLD LIMITED, THE MINISTER IN CHARGE OF MINES AND... [2020]DLHC10646

Date	2020-07-15
Suit No.	SUIT NO: GJ/0267/2020
Citation No.	[2020]DLHC10646

KWEKU T. ACKAAH-BOAFO J

MR. HAROLD TIVAH ATUGUBAH FOR THE APPLICANTS - PRESENT

MR. KIZITO BEYUO FOR THE 1ST RESPONDENT – PRESENT

MS. EUNICE AGYEIBEA OFFEI FOR THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS – PRESENT

[2020]DLHC10646
																																						<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" >IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 55 OF THE HIGH COURT
(CIVIL PROCEDURE) RULES, 2004 (C.I. 47)<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NEWMONT GHANA GOLD LIMITED, THE MINISTER IN CHARGE OF MINES AND THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>EX PARTE: GABRIEL NSIAH ABABIO (NSAANA HENE), MAAME AKOSUA KOBI,
MAAME ABIRI AND ABENA ATAA<o:p></o:p>(APPLICANTS)<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;">

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>MR. HAROLD TIVAH ATUGUBAH FOR THE
APPLICANTS - PRESENT<o:p></o:p>MR. KIZITO BEYUO
FOR THE 1ST RESPONDENT – 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;">

MS.
EUNICE AGYEIBEA OFFEI FOR THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS – PRESENT<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;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">DECISION<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;i.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Introduction/Overview:<o:p></o:p>[1]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On
November 19, 2019 the Applicants filed at the registry of this Court a Motion
on Notice for Judicial Review in the nature of Declaration and Mandamus pursuant
to Order 55 of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules, 2004 C.I. 47 for the
following reliefs:<o:p></o:p>“[a]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A declaration that the Applicants are
entitled to a prompt, fair and adequate compensation from the 1st Respondent
for the disturbance of the surface rights of the Applicants.<o:p></o:p>[b]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A declaration that the delay by the 1st
and/or 2nd Respondent to determine the compensation due the Applicants as a
result of the disturbance of the Applicants’ rights, constitute a neglect or
refusal on the part of the 2nd Respondent to determine the compensation due the
Applicants.<o:p></o:p>[c]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; An order of mandamus directed at the 2nd
Respondent compelling it to promptly determine and order the 1st Respondent to
pay the exact compensation due the Applicants for the disturbance of the
surface rights of the Applicants within 30 days of the said order.<o:p></o:p>[d]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; An order compelling the 1st Respondent to
pay the compensation assessed by the 2nd Respondent in respect of the
disturbance of the Applicants surface rights to the Applicants within 7 days
after the amount of compensation is assessed.<o:p></o:p>[e]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Costs, including Solicitors fees on a
full indemnity basis.”<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[2]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The
contention of the Applicants is that the 1st Respondent has infringed on their
s</main>