GH - SAVIOUR CHURCH OF GHANA VS ABRAHAM KWAKU ADUSEI & 3 ORS

On the 22nd day of July 2022, the Defendants/Applicants filed the instant Application praying the Court for an order setting aside the Entry of Judgment and all other related processes pursuant thereof on the 28th day of June, 2022.

The nucleus of the instant Application is captured by the Affidavit in Support of same.

The Affidavit was deposed to by one Kweku Ankrah, same reads:

“I KWAKU ANKRAH of House No. A53, AKIM OSIEM in the Eastern Region of the Republic of Ghana, Accra make Oath and say as follows:

1. That I am the Deponent herein.

2. That I am one of the Registered Trustees of the Saviour Church of Ghana, the Defendants/Judgement Debtors/Applicants herein, registered as a corporate body in accordance with the Provisions of the Land. (Perpetual Succession - Ordinance Cap.137 on 22nd January 1962 and also under the Religious Bodies Registration – 1989 PNDCL 221 on 20th November 1990).

3. That I do have the authority and consent to depose to this Affidavit in Support on matters that have peculiarly come to my knowledge and belief in the course of my association with this case, spanning over a twenty year period.

4. That at the hearing of this Application Counsel shall seek leave of this Honourable Court to refer to all the processes as filed in respect of this matter.

5. That on the 7th day of November 2018, this Honourable Court delivered judgment in this case pursuant to a Writ of Summons filed against the Defendants/Judgment Debtors/Applicants herein.

6. That I am advised and verily believe same to be true that the judgment of the Honourable Court decreed as follows:

“1. This Court decrees that Plaintiff is the only one legal entity by that name which is permitted by law to run churches and do religious and spiritual activities.

2. This Court further grants an order of perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants, their agents and assigns from using the name Saviour Church of Ghana for any spiritual and religious activities.

3. 1 further grant Plaintiff custody of all their branches in the country.”

7. That the Applicants herein then filed a Notice of Appeal against the aforesaid Judgment but the appeal was dismissed by a majority of 2 to 1, as I am advised and verily believe same to be true. (See Exhibit “SG 1”)

8. That I am further advised and verily believe same to be true that the Applicants herein then filed a Notice of Appeal in the Supreme Court and by a majority decision of 3 to 2 the ordinary bench of the Suprem