Grace Osei Afriyie v. Unibank Ghana Limited

MARIAMA OWUSU, J. A. On 22-7-2011, the High Court, Commercial Division, Kumasi in an application for interim injunction ruled among other things as follows: “In this court’s opinion, the Plaintiff has put forward a maintainable claim.

The Defendant has also put up a worthy defence.

Which of the 2 sides to this case would take precedence can only be realized after evidence has been taken from both sides.

Plaintiff has made this application praying for an order that the Defendant be made to publicize the loss of the document.

Between the period when she discovered the loss of her title deed and when she instituted the current suit, what has happened? She did not say.

This court has not been furnished with any evidence that she is on the verge of losing her property or that some person or persons whether known or unknown is about to deal with her property in a manner detrimental to her interest. The court has also not been furnished with any evidence that the Defendant intends her deeds to be used for some other collateral purpose which would not augur well for her.

What if her fears have already materialized and that the title deeds could be used adversely? It may have already been done and rights may have accrued.

The mischief may already have happened.

In any case, issues are to be settled and trial imminent.

The court will therefore preserve the status quo and hold the balance evenly between the parties until a final resolution of the matter.

See ODONKOR Vs. AMARTEI (1987-88) 1 GLR 578. The application for publication is therefore denied at this stage.

No awards as to costs. ”Dissatisfied with the ruling of the court, the Plaintiff filed an appeal to this court.

The Grounds of Appeal are: a. The Honourable Court erred by holding that the Plaintiff/Appellant had not established a sufficient basis for the grant of the motion although the Defendant/Respondent admits losing the document submitted to it by the Plaintiff/Appellant.

b. Additional grounds to be filed upon receipt of a certified copy of the Ruling.

The Relief Sought from This Court: a. An Order granting the said motion to compel the Defendant/Respondent to publish the fact of the loss of the Plaintiff/Appellant’s lease.

Before going into the merits of this appeal, I would like to give a brief background of this case.

The Plaintiff/Appellant in this case claims against the Defendant the following reliefs: 1. A declaration that, the continuing detention of the Plaintiff’s title deeds