THE REPUBLIC vs. NATIONAL PETROLEUM AUTHORITY, EX PARTE GHANA LPG OPERATORS ASSOCIATION (GLIPGOA) TORGBI ADAKU V [2021]DLCA10063

THE REPUBLIC vs. NATIONAL PETROLEUM AUTHORITY, EX PARTE GHANA LPG OPERATORS ASSO... [2021]DLCA10063

Date	2021-02-25
Suit No.	SUIT NO. H1/39/2021
Citation No.	[2021]DLCA10063

ADJEI J.A

SUURBAAREH J.A

WOOD J.

HOWARD T. ATUGUBA WITH PHILIP MORGAN FOR APPELLANT

ACE ANKOMAH FOR RESPONDENT. DAAD AKWASI (MRS)

[2021]DLCA10063
																																						<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" >THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NATIONAL PETROLEUM AUTHORITY<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT/
RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>EX PARTE GHANA LPG OPERATORS ASSOCIATION (GLIPGOA)<o:p></o:p>(1ST
APPLICANT/ APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>TORGBI ADAKU V<o:p></o:p>(2ND
APPLICANT/ APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, 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;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">SUIT NO. H1/39/2021&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:
25TH FEBRUARY, 2021<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>HOWARD T. ATUGUBA WITH PHILIP MORGAN FOR
APPELLANT<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" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">ACE ANKOMAH FOR RESPONDENT.
DAAD AKWASI (MRS)<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>ADJEI J.A, SUURBAAREH J.A, WOOD J.A<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="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
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">JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;ADJEI,
J.A:<o:p></o:p>The
Applicants filed an application for judicial review under Order 55 of the High
Court (Civil Procedure)Rules, 2004 (C.I.47) and subsequently filed an
application for interlocutory injunction to restrain the Respondent from
implementing the Cylinder Re-Circulation Model Policy and also from issuing licenses
to any person to build LPG bottling plants. The application for interlocutory
injunction was dismissed by the High Court on 2nd July, 2018 that the
Applicants failed to demonstrate any hardship they would suffer if the
injunction was not granted. The Applicants on 4th October, 2019 filed an
interlocutory appeal against the ruling of the High Court. The substantive
judicial review application was heard and dismissed on 9th July, 2019 and the
applicants dissatisfied and aggrieved by the said ruling filed an appeal
against same to the Court of Appeal on 4th October, 2019.<o:p></o:p>The
facts upon which the Appellants filed the judicial review application in the
High Court were that there was a gas explosion at an LPG Retail Station at
Atomic Junction Accra on 7th October, 2017 which compelled the President of the
Republic of Ghana acting on the advice of the Council of State to direct the
Respondent to implement the Cylinder Re-Circulation Model Policy. The policy
was implemented and the Appellants’ complaint was that the directive offended
the National Petroleum Authority Act, 2005 (Act 691), the main enactment
regulating Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) under which the Appellants had
previously obtained their licenses.<o:p></o:p>The
Respondent implemented the directive through a document titled “National
Liquefied Petroleum Gas Policy and the Cylinder Recirculation Model” which
classified the existing Liquefied Petroleum Gas retail stations into high and
low risk stations.<o:p></o:p>The
Liquefied Petroleum Gas stations in the country were licensed under Act 691 to
sell Liquefied Petroleum Gas but the directive classified the stations into as
high risk and low risk and it is the type of the classification a station
belonged to which permitted the type of the Liquefied Petroleum Gas it could
sell. The high risk stations were to sell pre-filled LPG cylinders and the low
risk stations were to sell auto gas and therefore in effect varied the licenses
the Appellants obtained under Act 691.<o:p></o:p>The
Appellants filed an application for judicial review for the following reliefs:
to declare the Cylinder Re-Circulation Model as void for being in conflict with
Act 691; to declare the policy void on grounds of unreasonableness and
illegality for offending article 23 of the Constitution of Ghana, 1992; and for
an order for a declaration that the Respondent has no power to limit the scope
of the licenses previously granted to the Appellants in accordance with Act
691. The Appellants further sought for an injunction to restrain the Respondent
from enforcing the policy which has categorized the Liquefied Petroleum Gas
into low and high risk and a further order to restrain the Respondent from
implementing the policy.<o:p></o:p>The
Respondent opposed the application on three grounds, namely; that the Liquefied
Petroleum Gas Policy and the Cylinder Re- Circulation Model that has been made
does not breach any law. Futhermore, Ghanaians generally will not suffer
hardship if the categorization of the LPG Retail Stations is &nbsp;introduced to reform the petroleum downstream
industry. Finally, there is no nexus or privies of contract between the
Applicants and the Respondent.<o:p></o:p>The
trial High Court dismissed the application as unmeritorious on 9th July, 2019.
The Appellants dissatisfied with the judgment filed an appeal against same on
4th October, 2019. The notice of appeal contained four grounds of appeal and
the Appellants indicated their intention to file an additional grounds of
appeal on receipt of the record of appeal but did not file additional grounds
of appeal on receipt of the record of appeal.<o:p></o:p>The
grounds of appeal are as follows:<o:p></o:p>“a. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The
judgment of the court below is against the weight of evidence on record.<o:p></o:p>b. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Her
Ladyship fundamentally erre</main>