ARLA FOODS LIMITED vs DYNASTY COMMERCIALS COMPANY LIMITED [2023]DLHC16619

Date	2023-10-26
Suit No.	SUIT NO. CM/RPC/0434/202
Citation No.	[2023]DLHC16619

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE FRANCIS OBIRI

PEGGY BOADI

SHADRACK ARHIN

[2023]DLHC16619
																																						<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" >ARLA FOODS
LIMITED<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>DYNASTY
COMMERCIALS COMPANY LIMITED<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:
12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:
12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">&nbsp;<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:
&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">&nbsp;<div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: black; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0.2pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:normal;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><a name="_heading=h.gjdgxs"></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">SUIT
NO. CM/RPC/0434/202&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:
26TH &nbsp;OCTOBER, 2023<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:normal;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">PEGGY BOADI FOR SHADRACK
ARHIN FOR PLAINTIFF<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:normal;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid black 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;On 26th
July 2023, the court ordered the parties to file their pre-trial checklists,
witness statements and all documents they intend to rely upon in the case
within 21 days. The parties have failed to comply with the Order of the court
as at today, 26th October, 2023.<o:p></o:p>It is trite law,
that time limits in court processes are too important for one to ignore.
They are meant to prevent delays by keeping the wheels of justice rolling
smoothly. If this were not so, parties would initiate actions in court and
thereafter go to sleep only to wake up at their own appointed time to continue
with such litigation at their pleasure. If this were allowed, litigation could
grind to a halt, a sure recipe for confusion and inordinate delays in the due
and proper administration of justice.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;See: OPPONG v ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND OTHERS [2000]
SCGLR 275<o:p></o:p>Orders setting
time limits are to ensure certainty and procedural integrity in the
administration of justice. I therefore cannot craft any rule to aid the parties,
nor will the end of justice be served if any attempt is made to do so.<o:p></o:p>See: DOKU v PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF GHANA [2005-2006]
SCGLR 700<o:p></o:p>I will therefore
invoke Rule 1 (3) of C.I 87 and strike out the case for want of prosecution.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&</main>