MR. COLLINS OTOO v. SOLOMON PUPULAMPO & ANOTHER
2014
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- KUSI APPIAH J.A (PRESIDING)
- GYAESAYOR, J.A
- SOWAH (MRS), J.A
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Equity and Trusts
2014
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Court of Appeal, per Sowah J.A., allowed an appeal against a High Court order that had restrained the registrar from paying GH¢31,500 held by the court to the appellant, who held a subsisting judgment affirmed by the Court of Appeal. The dispute stems from an earlier Tema High Court summary judgment granting the appellant GH¢30,000 plus bank interest and costs, and a subsequent Court of Appeal decision dismissing the respondent’s appeal while noting the fraud claim remained to be tried separately. After not appealing further, the respondent sued anew in Accra, joined Emmanuel Mainoo, and sought declaratory reliefs alleging fraud. The High Court granted an interlocutory injunction. On appeal, the Court of Appeal held that injunctions must follow settled principles: established right, balance of convenience, and adequacy of damages, and mere allegations of fraud do not vitiate subsisting judgments. It set aside the injunction and dismissed the application.
JUDGMENT
SOWAH J.A.
The background facts of this present appeal are as follows:
On 24th June 2009, the 1st defendant /appellant herein [hereafter referred to simply as the appellant] who was the plaintiff in the Tema High Court Suit No H1/117/2013 obtained summary judgment for the sum of GH¢30,000.00 with bank interest thereon and costs, against the plaintiff/respondent herein [hereinafter called the respondent] who was the defendant in that suit. The trial judge entered the summary judgment based on a letter written by the respondents’ lawyer explicitly admitting that the respondent took the amount of money claimed by the appellant but on behalf of a Mr. Manu [sic Mainoo]. Mr Manu was not a party in that Suit.
The respondent appealed the summary judgment to the Court of Appeal. The grounds of appeal were as follows:
1. The learned High Court Judge erred in law when he entered summary judgment against the defendant/appellant on a claim by the plaintiff/respondent which is based entirely on an allegation of fraud.
2. The learned High Court Judge erred when he failed to consider the defence of the appellant that Mr. Emmanuel Mainoo’s acceptance of liability for the payment of the sum of GH¢30,000.00 to the respondent is an issue that ought to be determined by the court.
Pending hearing of the substantive appeal, the Court of Appeal stayed execution of the judgment on terms; namely that the respondent pay the judgment debt of GH¢30,000.00 and costs of GH¢2,000.00 into court.
The appeal was subsequently heard and was dismissed on 19th July, 2012 in a judgment to be found at pages 25-33 of this record of appeal. The Court of Appeal held inter alia that the claim of the appellant contained two causes of action, namely:
1. A specific claim for the sum of GH₵30,000 being financial assistance and interest thereon, and
2. General and exemplary damages for fraud.
It held that the summary judgment related to the claim for financial assistance which was independent from the second claim for general damages for fraud, and so the trial judge had been right in granting the application for summary judgment. It further held that the trial judge had not made any reference to the claim for fraud nor awarded general damages, so therefore, that claim was still subsisting and during its hearing the respondent would have the chance to demonstrate that he had not defrauded the appellant.
The respondent did not pursue a further appeal to the Supreme Court but