FRANCIS KOTEI AFUTU VS ERNEST TETTEH OBUOBI
2022
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP ALEX OWUSU-OFORI (JA)
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
2022
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Before Justice Alex Owusu‑Ofori (JA), the 1st Plaintiff/Judgment Debtor applied on August 11, 2022 to stay execution of a judgment delivered on June 6, 2022 concerning approximately 19.646 acres of prime Santeo land near the East Legon Adjiriganor–Trasacco enclave. He asserted that, absent a stay, success on appeal would be rendered meaningless because the Defendant/Judgment Creditor was frantically developing the land and the Plaintiff would lose the property. The Defendant opposed, noting an Entry of Judgment was filed on July 8, 2022 and that service was effected by substituted service, and arguing the Plaintiff paid no valuable consideration, took the land in advance for work not completed, and had already sold parcels to third parties who continue developing. Applying Supreme Court guidance, the Court found no arguable points of law or special circumstances and dismissed the application.
The Plaintiff/Judgment/Debtor/Appellant/Applicant on the 11th day of August 2022 brought the instant application praying the Court to stay execution of the judgment of the Court dated June 6, 2022 and for any further order the Court may deem fit.
It is 1st Plaintiff’s contention that after the delivery of the Court’s judgment they became aggrieved of the said judgment and had since appealed against the decision of the Court.
That the Defendant/Judgment/Creditor/Respondent has served the 1st Plaintiff/Judgment/Debtor/Applicant with an Entry of Judgment in readiness of enforcing the judgment of the Court attached as Exhibit F.K.A.
That Santeo lands being prime lands lying near East Legon Adjiriganor-Trasacco enclave if the execution of the judgment is not stayed the 1st Plaintiff upon his success at the Court of Appeal will find that all his land measuring 19.646 acres, has been lost.
That the Defendant/Judgment/Creditor even before the judgment was handed down in his favour was engaged in the process of frantically developing the parcel of the subject land the subject of the instant appeal and the only ideal thing the Court can do is to stay execution of judgment.
The Defendant/Judgment/Creditor/Respondent opposed the application stating that after judgment was given on the 6th day of June 2022, Entry of judgment was filed on July 8th 2022. The Plaintiff/Judgment/Debtor became illusive in attempt to frustrate the Defendant judgment/Creditor from going into execution.
That they had to serve the 1st Plaintiff/Judgment/Debtor by substituted service.
It is the contention of the Defendant/Respondent that the applicant does not lose anything since he did not pay valuable consideration for the land which was in dispute but took same in advance as payment for work which he has not even completed.
During the pendency of the case the Plaintiff sold several parcels of land within the disputed acreage to third parties who have developed same and are still in the process of developing after judgment was granted. We have attached Exhibits of these developments to our affidavit in opposition.
In the Supreme Court case of JOSEPH V JABEILLE & ANOR 1963 1 GLR which was reiterated in the Supreme Court case of Prince William Tagoe v Albert G.K. Acquah on the 11th day of March 2009 Unreported. The Supreme Court laid the grounds for the granting of a stay of execution as follows:
1. The applicant must demonstrate that there are arguable points of law to be canvassed o