HEILAND RESOURCES LTD vs SINOPEC INTERNATIONAL PETROLEUM & ORS

This is a motion on notice for stay of proceedings pending appeal filed on behalf of 3rd Defendant/Applicant (referred to as Applicant) on 7th November, 2022.

I have read through the motion paper, affidavit in support and attached exhibits. I have also read through the affidavit in opposition as well all the attached annexures.

I have given careful considerations to the written submissions filed by both Counsel in support of and in opposition to the instant application.

The High Court although differently constituted granted Applicant’s motion to refer the matter to arbitration on 6th July, 2021. Plaintiff/Respondent (referred to as Respondent) being aggrieved by the said ruling appealed to the Court of Appeal. On 28th July, 2022, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered that the action be continued in the High Court. Applicant is dissatisfied with the said decision of the Court of Appeal and has caused its Counsel to file a notice of appeal at the Supreme Court seeking to set aside the ruling of the Court of Appeal.

The application before this Court therefore is to stay proceedings before this Court pending the determination of the interlocutory appeal against the Court of Appeal decision at the Supreme Court. An application of stay of proceedings can only succeed when Applicant demonstrates the existence of special or exceptional circumstances.

This principle was applied by the Supreme Court in the case of SETHI BROTHERS GHANA LTD VS. REGENCY ALLIANCE INSURANCE LTD. (CIVIL APPEAL NO. J8/68/2019) delivered on 30th May, 2019 speaking through Anin Yeboah JSC (as he then was).

An applicant in a motion for stay of proceedings pending the determination of an appeal is required to demonstrate that there is a serious question of law raised in the appeal, hardship will be occasioned to Applicant if proceedings are not stayed and the outcome of the appeal will be rendered nugatory if proceedings are not stayed.

Although Applicant deposed in the affidavit in support of this application that its appeal at the Supreme Court borders on the issue of jurisdiction, this Court is of the opinion that with the regards to the notice of appeal, the said deposition is not supported by the evidence on the records.

This is specially so, when the facts indicate that Applicant had objected to the jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal on the premise that there was no arbitration agreement in writing. Due to this objection, Respondent issued a Writ of Summons and S