EMELIA REINDORF VS CFC CONSTRUCTION LIMITED
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP NABEELA NAEEMA WAHAB J. (MS.)
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Applicant's case revolved around an accusation of contempt of court against the Respondents for attempting to execute an overturned judgment. The key issues addressed were the capacity of the Applicant and its counsel to file the application and whether the Respondents' actions warranted a contempt ruling. The court dismissed the application citing the Applicant's lack of capacity to file the suit. Costs were awarded against the Applicant.
I. APPLICANT’S CASE
1. On 16th April 2024, Mrs. Achiampong Esq. as counsel for the Applicant, stated to be Construction and Furniture (W. A) company Ltd, filed the instant application pursuant to Order 1 Rule 4 and Order 50 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (C. I. 47) seeking an Order of the Court to commit the Respondents to prison for contempt of Court for the reasons stated in the affidavit in support of the application.
2. In the affidavit in support of the application, Counsel for the Applicant, Mrs. Achiampong Esq. , as deponent stated that she has acted as Counsel for the Applicant and she has the authority of the Applicant to depose to the affidavit in support of the instant application.
3. It is the case of the Applicant as stated by the deponent that a legal baꢀle between the Applicant company and the 1st Respondent started in the year 1992 when Emelia and Philip Reindorf instituted Suit No. 1450/92 against the Applicant for a parcel of land situate at Mile 7 in Dome, Accra, hereafter also referred to as “the subject land”. The deponent admiꢀed that a default judgment was given in Suit No. 1450/92 on 22nd July 1997 in favour of Emelia and Philip Reindorf, the Plaintiffs in that case.
A copy of the Judgment dated 22nd July 1997 is aꢀached to the affidavit in support of the application and marked Exhibit B. 4. The deponent added that after judgment was entered in favour of Emelia and Philip Reindorf, the Applicant herein engaged Lawyer Bentum Esq. who instituted Suit No. BMISC 816/2012 in the year 2012, against Emelia Reindorf, substituted by Carl Josiah Reindorf, the 1st Respondent herein 1st defendant and Philip Reindorf as 2nd defendant.
The action in Suit No. BMISC 816/2012 was instituted to challenge the judgment given in favour of Emelia and Philip Reindorf on 22nd July 1997, in Suit No. 1450/92, on grounds that same had been obtained by fraud and illegally.
It is the case of the Applicant as stated by the deponent that by a judgment dated 28th June 2016, a copy of which is exhibited as Exhibit C, the High Court granted the Applicant’s prayer and set aside the Judgment of 22nd July 1997 given in Suit No. 1450/92 and in favour of Emelia and Philip Reindorf.
5. It is the further case of the Applicant as stated by the deponent in paragraph 16 of the affidavit in support of the application that aggrieved by the Judgment dated 28th June 2016 seꢀing aside the Judgment of 22nd July 1997 in favour of Emelia and Philip Reindorf, the 2nd R