Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
May 9, 2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
On the 2nd November, 2018, the Plaintiff issued a Writ of Summons against the 1st Defendant and 15 others.
On the 6th November, 2018, the 1st Defendant was served with the Writ of Summons.
On the 12th November, 2018, the 1st Defendant entered an appearance through his Lawyer, George Bernard Shaw.
Then on the 15th November, 2018, another Lawyer Hanifa Yahaya also entered an appearance for the 1st Defendant.
On the 5th December, 2018, Lawyer Samson Lardi Anyenini also filed another process as an Additional Solicitor for the 1st Defendant.
Counsel Samson Lardi Anyenini then proceeded to file a Statement of Defence for the 1st Defendant on the 13th December, 2018. Then on the 13th December, 2018, a Notice of Change of Solicitors was filed by Samson Lardi Anyenini of A – Partners @ Law for and on behalf of the 1st Defendant.
It is against this background that the Plaintiff has brought the present application seeking to strike out the Entry of Appearance filed by Hanifa Yahaya, Samson Lardi Anyenini and the Statement of Defence filed by Samson Lardi Anyenin for and on behalf of the 1st Defendant.
It is observed that during the pendency of the application, Lawyer George Bernard Shaw of K – Sam Law Firm filed a Notice to withdrawal as Lawyer for the 1st Defendant on the 15th April, 2019. Then on the 16th April, 2019, Hanifa Yahaya of Hay and Partners at Law also filed a Notice of withdrawal of the Entry of Appearance for the 1st Defendant.
With the withdrawal of George Bernard Shaw and Hanifa Yahaya, the only Notice of Appearance filed for and on behalf of the 1st Defendant is that filed by Samson Lardi Anyenini.
I must say that I share the view of Counsel for the Plaintiff/Applicant that the filing of these processes by Counsel Hanifa Yahaya and Sampson Lardi Anynini was done in contravention of the rules of Court.
And as the Supreme Court held in the case of PATRICK ANKOMANYI v HANNAH BUCKMAN; Civil Appeal No. J4/43, dated 26th February, 2014, that the rules of Court are not ornamental pieces.
They are meant to be complied with.
Subsequent processes filed by George Bernard Shaw and Hanifa Yahaya have watered down the effect of these processes earlier filed in the matter.
Having withdrawn their representation and the Entry of Appearance filed by them, the only process of appearance and representation are that filed by Samson Lardi Anyenini for and on behalf of 1st Defendant.
Although, the process filed by Samson Lardi Anyenini was captioned Notice o
AI Generated Summary
Justice George K. Koomson of the High Court addressed a procedural dispute stemming from multiple appearances and filings for the 1st Defendant after the Plaintiff issued a writ on November 2, 2018. Appearances were entered by George Bernard Shaw and Hanifa Yahaya, while Samson Lardi Anyenini later filed as Additional Solicitor, submitted a Statement of Defence, and lodged a Notice of Change of Solicitors on December 13, 2018. During the Plaintiffs application to strike certain filings, both Shaw and Yahaya withdrew their appearances, leaving Anyeninis filings. Emphasizing that court rules are not ornamental and must be applied to achieve speedy and effective justice under Order 1 rule 1(2) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2004 (C.I. 47), the court accepted the Notice of Change of Solicitors and the Statement of Defence as duly filed, struck out the Notice of Appointment of Additional Solicitor, and awarded costs to the Plaintiff to sanitize the proceedings and avoid delay.