BA TIMBER TRUST FOUNDATION vs. THE REGISTRAR GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT AND ASUO BOMASADU TIMBER & SAWMILLS LTD [2022]DLHC11753

BA TIMBER TRUST FOUNDATION vs. THE REGISTRAR GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT AND ASUO BOMA... [2022]DLHC11753

Date	2022-07-05
Suit No.	SUIT NO. CM/MISC/0445/2022
Citation No.	[2022]DLHC11753

HIS LORDSHIP FRANCIS OBIRI ‘J’.

BOBBY BANSON FOR THE APPLICANT/RESPONDENT

OBENG-MANU FOR THE 2ND RESPONDENT/APPLICANT

NO REPRESENTATION FOR THE 1ST RESPONDENT

[2022]DLHC11753
																																						<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" >BA TIMBER TRUST FOUNDATION<o:p></o:p>(APPLICANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE REGISTRAR GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT AND ASUO BOMASADU
TIMBER &amp; SAWMILLS LTD<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT/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;">

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>BOBBY BANSON FOR THE APPLICANT/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>OBENG-MANU FOR THE 2ND
RESPONDENT/APPLICANT<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;">

NO REPRESENTATION FOR THE 1ST
RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>HIS LORDSHIP
FRANCIS OBIRI ‘J’.<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="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:150%;
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;I have listened
to the submissions for and against the motion filed on 1st June,
2022 by the 2nd Respondent/Applicant hereinafter called the
Applicant.&nbsp; I have also listened to the
submissions by both counsel.&nbsp; The Applicant/Respondent
hereinafter called the Respondent initially filed an Originating Motion against
the 1st Respondent and the Applicant herein before the High
Court.&nbsp; The Applicant herein (Asuo Bomasadu
Timber and Sawmills Ltd) filed a motion to have the Respondent initial
Originating Motion referred to the Chief Justice to determine the forum
convenience. <o:p></o:p>The judge agreed
with the present Applicant in respect of the motion and referred the matter to
the Chief Justice to determine the forum convenience.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>Under Order 3
Rule 2 of C.I 47, such right is open to a Defendant or Respondent before filing
his defence or affidavit in opposition.<o:p></o:p>Once the
Defendant raises an objection to the geographical jurisdiction of the court,
the jurisdiction of the court is ousted and it is not open to the judge to exercise
any discretion but to report the pendency of the matter to the Chief Justice
under Order 3 Rule 2(2) of C.I 47.<o:p></o:p>See: WILMOT v WILMOT [1981] GLR 521<o:p></o:p>This means, when
a judge makes an order referring a matter to the Chief Justice to determine the
forum convenience, the court itself has no discretion to do anything with the
case except, adjournments until the Chief Justice direction has been received. <o:p></o:p>Therefore, if a party
or an Applicant intends to amend and or discontinue the action, it can only be
done by the court vacating the order referring the matter to the Chief Justice
or the party will have to wait for the Chief Justice direction to the court.<o:p></o:p>A Defendant is not
to file a defence or response or affidavit in opposition when he has questioned
the geographical jurisdiction of a court.<o:p></o:p>Again, when a party
file notice of discontinuance in a case, the party must wait for the court to
pronounce on it before the party can take another step.&nbsp; This is because, the court before which the
notice of discontinuance is pending has a wide discretion as to the terms and
conditions upon which it should grant the leave to discontinue the action.<o:p></o:p>See: AMOAKU v KWAN &amp; ANOTHER [1975] 1 GLR 25<o:p></o:p>The court has
power under certain circumstances to prevent a party to bring a fresh action after
discontinuance. The court also has power to impose condition precedent which must
be fulfilled before the party who discontinued can bring any fresh action or to
initiate another proceeding in court.<o:p></o:p>See: SASRAKU III v ELLIS &amp; WOOD FAMILIES [1989-1990]
1 GLR 498<o:p></o:p>The phrase,
further proceedings in an action means, taking any formal proceedings with a
view to continue with the litigation.<o:p></o:p>See: SASRAKU III v ELLIS &amp; WOOD FAMILIES
(SUPRA)<o:p></o:p>