RANA MOTORS & METAL WORKS ENGINEERING CO. LTD & ANOR VS CAESAR JOANA & ORS
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP ALEXANDER OSEI TUTU (J.)
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Plaintiff sought Summary Judgment, but the 1st Defendant had filed a Statement of Defence out of time and without leave. The High Court refused the Summary Judgment application, emphasizing the obligation to consider out-of-time defenses and ensure justice. Several precedents were cited to support the ruling.
The Application for Summary Judgment is refused so far as the 1st Defendant has now filed his Statement of Defence, albeit out of time and even though without the leave of the Court.
In the case of THE REPUBLIC VRS HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) ACCRA, EX–PARTE PART HOLDING COMPANY LTD [2013–2014] 2 SCGLR 1219, the Supreme Court per His Lordship Anin Yeboah JSC (as he then was) held “in the light of different judicial authorities, it must be concluded that a Court cannot disregard a Statement of Defence filed out of time as an nullity.
As a matter of obligation the Court is bound to look at it and deal with it in such a manner that justice can be done.
By extension, a trial Judge is bound by settled practice above to consider the Statement of Defence even though it was filed out of time set by the rules of the Court”. (See also NANA AMPOFO KYEI BARFOUR VRS JUSMOH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD AND OTHERS [2017] 113 GMJ 118 AT PAGE 146 AND THE REPUBLIC VRS HIGH COURT AND ANOTHER; EX–PARTE OHENE [1995–96] GLR 1 at pages 6–7, Supreme Court Granted the Defendant and even failed to file defence, I doubt whether it would have been wrong for the Court to grant him leave to do so if he had demonstrated that he has a reasonable defence.
In the case of BALLAST NEDAM GHANA BV VRS HORIZON MARINE CONSTRUCTION LTD [2010] SCGLR 435 the Supreme Court held that “although the procedure for Summary Judgment under Order 14 of C. I. 47 enables the Plaintiff to obtain a speedy and Summary Judgment without a trial even in cases where the Defendant to the action expresses an intention to defend the action, the Court may only grant the application in cases where the Defendant is made to set up a good defence or raise an issue which sought to be tried”. Finally, since the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff includes perpetual injunction which the title of the plaintiff is in issue, the Court cannot grant such an application without going to trial. (See ROCHER DE GRANT AND ORS VRS BANK OF GHANA CIVIL APPLICATION NO. J4/51/2015, SC AND AYIKU IV VRS AG AND ANOR [2009] 5 GMJ, 148 at 972 C. A. Accordingly, the instant Application is dismissed.
(SGD. ) H/L ALEXANDER OSEI TUTU JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT