Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
May 10, 2023
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
RULING ON APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER OF INTERLOCUTORY INJUNCTION
The Plaintiff instituted this action against the Defendants herein and has filed a motion on notice for an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the Defendants herein, his agents/servants/assigns/relatives etc.
from holding himself out or allowing himself to be held out or acting as head of the Oshiu Family of Oshiuman pending the determination of the suit, and for any further orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit do to order in the circumstances.
The Defendants is vehemently opposed to the instant application and avers that he was elected as the head of family of the Oshiu family in accordance to their customs and practice and thus the instant application ought to be thrown out.
According to S. A. Brobbey, in his book Practice & Procedure in the Trial Court &Tribunals of Ghana at pg.
444, “the primary object of such interlocutory injunction is to obviate, before a case is finally determine, any waste, damage or alienation of the property which is in dispute”. The governing principle applicable to applications for interlocutory relief is whether on the face of the affidavit there is the need to preserve the status quo in order to avoid irreparable damage to the Applicant, provided his case is not frivolous or vexatious. (See these cases; Owusu v. Owusu Ansah [2007-08] SCGLR 870, Pountney v. Doegah [1987-88] 1 GLR 111, CA and America Cyanamid Co v. Ethicon Ltd [1975] 1 ALLRE 504). The Plaintiff raises triable facts and the Defendants also makes his defence before the Court.
This Honourable Court is of the view that the action before it is not vexatious.
The Honourable Court upon consideration of all the material facts presented to this Honourable Court is of the view that, it will be best to maintain the status quo in order to avoid irreparable damage to the Applicants and the respondents as well.
Thus, the Defendants/respondent, his agents/servants/assigns/relatives etc.
are injunct from holding himself out or allowing himself to be held out or acting as head of the Oshiu Family of Oshiuman pending the determination of the suit.
The Plaintiffs/Applicants, their agents/ servants / assigns / relatives etc.
are also injunct from holding themselves out or allowing themselves to be held out or acting as head of the Oshiu Family of Oshiuman pending the final determination of the suit.
The Plaintiffs are also to undertake to pay any cost the Defendants may incur due to
AI Generated Summary
The High Court, per Her Ladyship Justice Priscilla Dapaah Mireku (Mrs.), ruled on an application for interlocutory injunction in a dispute within the Oshiu Family of Oshiuman over who may act as head of family. The plaintiff sought to restrain the defendant from holding himself out as head pending determination, while the defendant opposed, claiming he was duly elected under customary practice and asking that the application be dismissed. Relying on S. A. Brobbey’s treatise and authorities including Owusu v. Owusu Ansah, Pountney v. Doegah, and America Cyanamid, the court emphasized the need to preserve the status quo and prevent irreparable harm. Finding triable issues and that the application was not vexatious, the court restrained both sides from holding themselves out as head pending the suit and required the plaintiffs to undertake to pay costs if the defendants ultimately prevail.