HANNAH ASANTE & FRANCIS ASANTE v. KWADJO ASANTE CONTRACT LIMITED & ORS

The High Court, per Samuel K. A. Asiedu J., considered an originating motion by the legal personal representatives of the late Madam Rosina Austin Asante seeking wide-ranging corporate remedies against the 1st respondent company, certain individuals, and the Registrar-General’s Department. The applicants invoked sections 99, 217 and 218 of the Companies Act, 1963 (Act 179), aiming to invalidate director appointments, restrain purported control by respondents, expunge entries from the Registrar’s records, close a UT Bank Koforidua account, declare themselves 50% shareholders, rectify the register, and compel corporate meetings. The court held that legal personal representatives enjoy dividends and remedies but cannot attend or vote before registration under section 99(4); removal of directors must follow section 185 (Pinamang v. Abrokwa); and section 162 meeting orders require impracticability, which was not shown. It found that declaratory claims regarding accounts and corporate management were not cognizable under sections 217/218, and that fraud allegations concerning shareholding could not be resolved on affidavit and should proceed by writ. The motion was dismissed.