SAMUEL AYIM & ANOR VS MENZGOLD GHANA LIMITED & ORS

I have listened to the submissions for and against the grant of the application for Stay of Execution of the Order of this court dated 27th April, 2023. I have read the documents filed in support and in opposition to the application.

It is trite law, that the practice of the courts is not to put fetters on victorious parties from reaping the fruits of their victories in legal proceedings by granting Stay of Execution.

However, Stay of Execution is granted in exceptional cases or circumstances.

See: ACQUAH v TAGOE [2017-2020] 2 SCGLR 73 However, what will amount to exceptional circumstances will depend on the circumstances of each case.

See: NII TETTEY OPREMEREH II & ANOTHER v KOMEXA LIMITED, LANDS COMMISSION AND OTHERS [2021] 171 GMJ 152 SC GOLDEN BEACH HOTELS (GHANA) LIMITED v PACK PLUS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [2012] 1 SCGLR 452 Stay of Execution means, suspending the enforcement of a judgment under the procedure prescribed by law for enforcing judgments.

It can also mean stopping, delaying or imposing any fetters on a judgment creditor to obtain an appropriate writ of execution.

See: OPPAN V FRANS CO.

LTD. [1984-86] 1 GLR 281 CA Let me say that in this case, the Interested Party/Applicant (hereinafter called the Applicant) has not filed any appeal against the ruling of this Court differently constituted, dated 27th April, 2023. However, under Order 43 rule 11 of C. I. 47, stay of execution can be applied for whether or not an appeal is pending against the judgment or the decision which had been given by a court.

And the meaning of a party within the context of Order 43 rule 11 includes the parties in the case as well as their agents, servants etc.

and anybody who is directly affected by the decision or the judgment of the court.

See: NISSA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER v TEMA MUNICIPAL ASSEMBLY AND 8 OTHERS [2012] 36 MLRG 75 CA In this case, the Applicant, Economic and Organized Crime Office (EOCO), is not a party in respect of which the Order dated 27th April, 2023 was made.

However, in its affidavit in support, it averred that it is prosecuting a case in respect of the properties which the Order dated 27th April, 2023 revolves.

The Applicant added, that the properties referred to in the 27th April, 2023 Order of this Court have been frozen as far back as 2019 by another High Court, hence their application for the Order dated 27th April, 2023 to be stayed.

The Plaintiffs/Respondents (hereinafter called the Respondents) cou