COLONIAL PROPERTIES CO. LTD. & ANOTHER vs LANDS COMMISSION & ANOTHER
December 19, 2022
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE AMOS WUNTAH WUNI
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Administrative Law
December 19, 2022
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In the High Court of Ghana, Justice Amos Wuntah Wuni considered an interlocutory injunction application filed on 7 June 2022 by the Plaintiffs/Applicants seeking to restrain the Lands Commission (1st Defendant/Respondent) from regularizing any interest for the 2nd Defendant/Respondent over disputed land and to restrain the 2nd Defendant from interfering with the land pending trial. The Applicants alleged dispossession by the 2nd Defendant, who arrested their workmen and took possession, and produced searches indicating the land was part of the Airport Extension Acquisition, while another search linked the land to a grant from the 1st Plaintiff Company to the 2nd Defendant. The 2nd Defendant relied on long possession since 1998 and development permits, arguing the status quo should be maintained; the Lands Commission opposed, claiming the Applicants lacked demonstrable interest and warning of interference with a valid state allottee. After reviewing pleadings, affidavits, and submissions, the Court refused the injunction as not maintainable and awarded costs of GH5,000 to each Defendant.
By an application for Interlocutory Injunction filed on 7th June 2022, the Plaintiff/Applicant (hereafter called the Applicant) prays for an order –
i. “... restraining the 1st Defendant/Respondent from granting any interest whatsoever by way of regularization to the 2nd Defendant/Respondent in respect of the land in dispute pending the final determination of this suit upon the grounds contained in the accompanying affidavit.
ii. “... restraining the 2nd Defendant/Respondent, his assigns, agents, privies and workmen from further interfering and/or dealing howsoever with the land in dispute pending the final determination of this suit upon the grounds contained in the accompanying affidavit.”
The Court’s power to grant Interlocutory Injunctions is circumscribed and regulated by Order 25 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (C.I. 47) and our Courts have spoken clearly, loudly and authoritatively on when, why, how and who may or may not be granted an Order of Interlocutory Injunction. Indeed, eminent Ghanaian Jurists, Legal Practitioners and Students of the Law have distilled notable ex cathedra pronouncements and indicia from reported cases of our Courts, particularly our Apex Court, to guide all Courts in hearing and determining applications for interlocutory injunctions. A few of such pronouncements and indicia would serve to underpin and fortify this Ruling.
First and foremost, in ODONKOR and Others v AMARTEI [1987-88] 1 GLR 578 the Supreme Court, speaking through His Lordship Adade JSC, held that:
“(1) The basic purpose of interim orders was, as much as possible, to hold the balance evenly between the parties, pending a final resolution of matters in difference between them, and also to ensure that at the end of the day the successful party did not find that his victory was an empty one, or one that brought him more problems than blessings.”
Also, speaking through Her Ladyship Justice Sophia Adinyira JSC, in OWUSU v OWUSU-ANSAH and Another [2007-08] 2 SCGLR 870, the Apex Court, in Holding (1) stated that:
“(1) The granting or refusal of an injunction is at the discretion of the trial court but that discretion has to be exercised judiciously ... The fundamental principle in applications for interim injunction is whether the applicant has a legal right at law or in equity, which the court ought to protect by maintaining the status quo until the final determination of the action on its merits. This could only be determined by consideri