Try asking the following...
RULING
MOTION ON NOTICE FOR STAY OF EXECUTION PENDING THE DETERMINATION OF ANOTHER MATTER TO SET ASIDE THE CONSENT JUDGMENT OF THIS COURT DATED 1ST FEBRUARY 2018.
The instant application has been filed at the behest of the Plaintiff Judgment Debtor Applicant (hereinafter referred to as Applicant) for a Stay of Execution of the Consent Judgment of this Court dated 1st February, 2018 pending the determination of another matter filed in respect of Setting Aside the said Consent Judgment on grounds of irregularity rendering the said Judgment void.
The basis for the instant application is that the said Consent Judgment sins against certain Provisions of the Foreign Exchange Act, 2006 (Act 723); thus, rendering it void ab initio and unenforceable.
That Section 3 (1) of Act 723 provides that a person shall not engage in the business of dealing in foreign exchange without a license under the Act.
That the Terms of Settlement adopted by the Court as its Consent Judgment sins against this Provision because the amounts quoted thereon are in United States Dollars and not in Ghana Cedis. That because there is no proof that the Parties have licenses to trade in foreign currency, the purported agreement is illegal because it is forbidden by Statute or Public Policy.
Applicant alleges that its previous Lawyers failed to advise it as to the illegality of the transaction between the Parties per the Fixed Note Agreement; thus, rendering the Terms of Settlement filed on 9th January, 2018 void.
That the Court was not clothed with jurisdiction to determine the matter as the Consent Judgment it gave on 1st February, 2018 was in violation of Act 723
That Applicant has therefore issued a new Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim in another Court seeking to set aside the said Consent Judgment.
That because Defendant Judgment Creditor Respondent (hereinafter referred to as Respondent) is currently taking steps to go into execution of the said Judgment of this Court which under Act 723 is illegal, the instant application ought to be granted pending the determination of the new Writ filed.
According to Respondent, Applicant has filed two different Writs of Summons and Statement of Claim; one in Suit No: CM/OCC/2023 and another one in Suit No: CM/OCC/0686/2022; seeking basically similar reliefs in both suits.
That because Applicant failed to inform the Court about the latter suit, the instant application is an abuse of the Court process as it is calculated to stall the execution pr