DUTCH AFRICAN TRADING COMPANY v. WEST AFRICA MILLS CO LTD
2022
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE JUSTIN KOFI DORGU
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Alternative dispute resolution
2022
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Justice Justin K. Dorgu of the Ghana High Court ruled on a post-appeal motion by West Africa Mills Co. Ltd to set aside the Entry of Judgment filed by Dutch African Trading Company following a Court of Appeal decision that allowed Dutch African Trading’s appeal and set aside Justice Doreen G. Boakye Agyei’s earlier refusal to enforce a foreign arbitral award. West Africa Mills argued the Entry of Judgment was irregular because it lacked a certificate under Rule 37 of the Court of Appeal Rules (C.I 19), allegedly required for enforcement outside the Court of Appeal. Analyzing Rules 36 and 37 together, the judge held that Rule 37’s certificate applies only when the Court of Appeal directs enforcement by “any other Court.” As the appellate judgment did not itself require execution or direct enforcement elsewhere and arbitral awards are enforced by the High Court as the court below, the Entry of Judgment in the High Court was proper. The motion was refused, with costs of GH¢2,000 against West Africa Mills.
RULING
This case that emanated from the High Court was seeking leave of the Court to enforce
a foreign arbitral award. The High Court presided over by Justice Doreen G. Boakye
Agyei (Mrs) on 20th March 2020 refused to grant the application, in other words
dismissed the Applicant’s case and gave judgment for the Respondent therein West
Africa Mills Co. Ltd. The Applicant dissatisfied with the decision of the High Court
filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal.
On the 20th of January, 2022, the Court of Appeal heard the appeal and gave judgment
for the Applicant by allowing the appeal and set aside the judgment of the High Court.
Subsequently, the Applicant herein, Dutch African Trading Company filed on the 11th
of March 2022 an Entry of Judgment based on the Court of Appeal Judgment and have
same served on the Respondent/applicant herein. The details of the process reads:-
“JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL DATED AND ENTERED THE 20TH JANUARY, 2021.
Upon this matter coming before their Lordships of the Court of Appeal for trial and
the Justices of the Court of Appeal having unanimously upheld the appeal and held
that the award of the Tribunal be enforced in Ghana against the Respondent herein,
judgment is hereby entered for the Applicant against the Respondent as follows:
Summary of amount due as of January 2022
GPB, EUROS, GH¢
Award AAO36A Principal £2, 048, 770.00 Nil Nil
Interest £ 397, 498.25
Cost £ 3, 135.00
Now, when this entry of Judgment document was served on the Respondent, he
promptly filed the instant motion under Order 81 rule 2(1) of the C.I 47 and Rules 36
and 37 of C.I 19, the Court of Appeal Rules. The gravamen of the application is that
the Entry of Judgment process filed on the 11th of March, 2020 does not comply with
Rules 36 and 37 of the C.I 19. Per paragraphs 8 through 11 of the Affidavit in support
which I reproduce hereunder, the Applicant set down the following as the basis for
the application.
“8. That I am advised by Counsel and verily believe same to be true that
where the judgment is to be enforced in Court other than the Court of
Appeal, a Certificate signed by the presiding Judge shall be transmitted to
that other Court.
9. That I am further advised by Counsel and believe same to be true that the
Applicant/Appellant/Respondent filed the Entry of Judgment at the High
Court without obtaining a Certificate from the Court of Appeal before
doing so, thus making the Entry of Judgment defective.
10. That as a