GH - CAL BANK PLC VS BILAL FAYEZ HAMOUI

On 26th February 2024, the Defendant/Applicant (hereinafter called the Applicant) filed a motion on notice before the court.

The motion is praying the court, to strike out the Plaintiff’/Respondent (hereinafter called the Respondent) Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim, and make a consequential order by dismissing the entire suit.

The motion is supported by affidavit and exhibits.

The relevant paragraphs are reproduced below: 2. That I have the consent of the Defendant to depose to this affidavit on matters within my knowledge, information and belief unless I state otherwise.

3. That at the hearing of this application, lawyer for the Defendant shall, with the leave of the court refer to all processes so far filed in this action as if same have been set out in details herein and sworn to under oath.

4. That the Defendant caused an action to be instituted against the Plaintiff herein in June 2023 with Suit No. CM/BDC/0500/2023 (Wherein the Plaintiff herein is the Defendant therein). Evidence of this is annexed hereto as exhibit 1. 5. That in the said suit, the Plaintiff herein but Defendant therein entered appearance on 15th June 2023. Evidence of the appearance is annexed hereto as exhibit 2 and further filed its Statement of Defence on 10th July 2023. Evidence of this is annexed hereto as exhibit 3. 6. That indeed, this first action is currently at the pre-trial settlement stage.

7. That whilst the first suit with number CM/BDC/0500/2023 is pending, the Plaintiff herein commenced the instant action.

8. As can be gleaned from the pleadings in the two suits, the subject matter is the same and the parties are also the same.

9. That the commencement of the present action, clearly, is a complete abuse of the processes of the court.

10. That the reliefs being prayed for by the Plaintiff in the present action can be dealt with in the first suit.

11. That maintaining the instant action will subject the Defendant to enormous cost and inundate the court unnecessarily with the same matter between the same parties.

12. That I humbly and respectfully pray therefore, that the pleadings in the present suit be struck out and the action dismissed for being an abuse of the processes of this Honourable Court.

The Respondent opposed the application.

It filed affidavit in opposition.

The relevant paragraphs are as follows: 2. That the Plaintiff Bank is vehemently opposed to the instant application and will contend, that the motion is misconceived and b