MULUNGUSID INVESTMENT LIMITED vs. EMBASSY OF HUNGARY [2022]DLHC11247

Date	2022-02-09
Suit No.	SUIT NO.: CM/OCC/0472/19
Citation No.	[2022]DLHC11247

HER LADYSIDP JUSTICE AFI AGBANU KUDOMOR

BEN TAIWO ADEKANLA FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT PRESENT

DAME AWOONOR - WILLIAMS HOLDING BRIEF FOR ANDREW KHARTEY FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPLICANT PRESENT

[2022]DLHC11247
																																						<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" >MULUNGUSID INVESTMENT LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/
RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>EMBASSY OF HUNGARY<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/
APPLICANT)<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;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">SUIT
NO.: CM/OCC/0472/19&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: 9TH&nbsp; FEBRUARY, 2022<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>BEN TAIWO ADEKANLA FOR THE PLAINTIFF/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;">

DAME AWOONOR -
WILLIAMS HOLDING BRIEF FOR ANDREW KHARTEY FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPLICANT PRESENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HER LADYSIDP JUSTICE AFI AGBANU KUDOMOR<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;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>&nbsp;MOTION
ON NOTICE FOR AN ORDER TO STRIKE OUT THE SUIT FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION<o:p></o:p>Counsel
for Defendant/Applicant (Applicant) has prayed the Court for an Order to Strike
out the instant suit for want of Jurisdiction.<o:p></o:p>The
grounds being that Applicant is a diplomatic entity which entered into a
Tenancy Agreement with Plaintiff/Respondent (Respondent) for the renting of
Respondent's apartment as accommodation for its staff in furtherance of its
official functions.<o:p></o:p>That
following a dispute between both Parties in respect of the said tenancy,
Respondent instituted the instant action against Applicant.<o:p></o:p>That
Applicant's diplomatic status renders its immune from the Civil Jurisdiction of
this country especially as the said Tenancy Agreement between the Parties which
was in furtherance of the official functions further reinforces Applicant's
immunity from the Civil Jurisdiction of the Courts in Ghana.<o:p></o:p>That
because Jurisdiction is a fundamental issue, this Court cannot assume
Jurisdiction in a matter in which the Law has expressly taken away its power to
preside over; and so for this reason, the instant suit be struck out.<o:p></o:p>In
the Affidavit in Opposition, there are depositions that the instant application
is misconceived, frivolous and unmeritorious. That this is because the concept
of diplomatic immunity is not absolute; even if Applicant enjoys this purported
absolute immunity, it has waived it by voluntarily entering into the said
Tenancy Agreement with Respondent by which it committed to submit itself to the
Laws of the country and so it is estopped from resiling from the said
commitment.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;That
Applicant also submitted itself to the Jurisdiction of the Ghana _Arbitration
Center for more than ten months in respect of this dispute and ":1thdrew
om the said proceedings because of an alleged effort by the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs to mediate.<o:p></o:p>That
Applicant by its conduct is estopped from waving the diplomatic immunity flag
at t is stage having waived same expressly by signing the Tenancy Agreement and
impliedly by its conduct.<o:p></o:p>That
the instant suit concerns a commercial transaction between the Parties for
which there can be no immunity against Civil Jurisdiction of the Courts of
Ghana; and so for these reasons, the instant suit ought to be dismissed.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; '<o:p></o:p>WRITTEN
SUBMISSIONS BY COUNSEL FOR APPLICANT<o:p></o:p>Counsel
for Applicant referred to Article 31 of the Vienna Convention in support of his
prayer for the instant suit to be struck out.<o:p></o:p>That
the first Schedule of the Diplomatic Immunities Ac.t, 1962 (Act 148)
reemphasizes the Vienna Convention and crystallizes it into local legislation:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>That
the only exception that may have removed the cloak of immunity from Applicant
would have been if Applicant's acts were outside its official functions.<o:p></o:p>He
stated that because Applicant rented the said premises for its staff, it was
for an official purpose and so the said transaction is exempted from the Civil
Jurisdiction of the Courts of the country. ·<o:p></o:p>He
referred to the case of Armon &amp; Anor </main>