GH - ERNESMAY CHEMIST LIMITED v. BENIJAX PHARMACY & ORS

RULING

i. introduction:

[1] Order 25 r 1 of CI 47 stipulates that the court may grant an injunction by an interlocutory order in all cases in which it appears to the court to be just or convenient to do so, and the order may be made either unconditionally or upon such terms and conditions as the court considers just. In deciding whether or not to grant an order of interlocutory injunction it has been held that the court would consider the justness and convenience of the order.

[2] Drawing on the provision of the law cited herein, learned Counsel for the Plaintiff/Applicant to whom I refer simply as the Applicant has filed in this court on November 27, 2018, an application praying for:

“… an order restraining the 1st Defendant/Respondent from operating a retail pharmacy in close proximity to the Plaintiff pharmacy pending the final determination of the instant suit herein as per the grounds set out in the accompanying affidavit”

ii. The case of Plaintiff/Applicant

[3] Speaking to the motion, learned Counsel relied on all the averments as set out in the accompanying affidavit and submitted that the 2nd Defendant is mandated by law to regulate the profession of pharmacy which is important aspect of its mandate as per Section 2 of Pharmacy Act, 1994 (Act 489) and also the provisions of Health Professions Regulatory Bodies Act, 2013 (Act 857). Learned Counsel further submitted by referring to Section 80 (d) of Act 857 that the 2nd Defendant in carrying out its mandate and functions is required to ensure that there is equitable and accessible distribution of pharmaceutical premises.

[4] Counsel further submitted that in carrying out its mandate the 2nd Defendant has guidelines and by those guidelines the 2nd Defendant has set out location requirements. Counsel referred to Exhibit BPA and Defendants’ Exhibit Q1, being the Guidelines of the Pharmacy Council of Ghana and submitted that by Clause C1, “the distance between the proposed site and other retail facilities shall be guided by accessibility to the facilities, population and distance criteria (400m radius)”. According to Counsel the clause means every retail pharmacy should not be more than 400 meters from another.

[5] According to paragraph 7 of the supporting affidavit it is deposed that the only exception to the 400-Meter rule contained in the Guidelines is where the existing and incoming facilities are on the opposite sides of a dual carriage road, between a retail and a wholesale, or b

RULING

i. introduction:

ii. The case of Plaintiff/Applicant

ERNESMAY CHEMIST LIMITED v. BENIJAX PHARMACY & ORS

Areas of Law

RULING