S.K. GORDOR & ORS VS TOGBE TORVOR & ORS
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE DANIEL MENSAH, ESQ.
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
After the High Court dismissed a land dispute suit involving parties connected to the Soga family and prior judgments concerning the Fievie Clan, the Plaintiffs/Appellants/Applicants sought a stay of execution pending appeal. The original suit, filed on 06/09/2021 against six defendants over land at Awusakope near Sogakope, was dismissed on 22/11/2021 as a brazen abuse of process. On 31/05/2023, Applicants moved for a stay, later filing a supplementary affidavit dated 12/07/2023. The 6th Defendant/Respondent raised a preliminary legal objection that the dismissal ruling is not executable and therefore cannot be stayed. Citing Ex parte SIDI and GOLDEN BEACH HOTELS, the court agreed, found no executable post-judgment process, struck out the stay application, and awarded GH2,500 costs to the 6th Defendant/Respondent.
On the 31/05/2023 the Plaintiffs/Appellants/Applicants herein filed a motion for stay of execution pending appeal of the ruling of this Honourable Court dated 22/11/2021. Attached to the said motion was an affidavit in support detailing the basis of the application.
Thereafter the Plaintiffs/Appellants/Applicants went on to file a Supplementary affidavit in support dated 12/07/2023. The 6 th defendant/respondent/respondent upon being served with the motion for stay and the supplementary affidavit in support filed a notice of legal objection to the application filed by the applicants.
The grounds for the said legal objection was that the ruling of the court that the applicants wanted to stay was given simpliciter on grounds of brazen abuse of the process based on a previous decisions in favour of the Fievie Clan against the Soga family represented by the plaintiffs/Applicants which ruling is not executable hence the cannot be stayed.
th To help understand the basis of the preliminary legal objection by Counsel for the 6 Defendant/Respondent, a brief summary of the facts leading to the ruling dated 31/05/2021 ought to be given.
On the 06/09/2021 the Plaintiffs/Appellants/Applicants caused a writ against 6 Defendants including the 6 th Defendant/Respondent/Respondent for certain reliefs including declaration of title, recovery of possession, perpetual injunction and damages covering the land in dispute being at Awusakope near Sogakope.
The 6 th Defendant/Respondent/Respondent upon being served with the said writ together with the accompanying Statement of Claim filed an application to set aside the writ on grounds of abuse of process.
In the said application, the 6 th Defendant referred to earlier judgments of the court between the parties which referred to the same land in dispute.
th Even though the Plaintiffs/Appellants/Applicants denied the said claim by the 6 Defendant/Respondent/Respondent this Honourable Court ordered written submissions to be filed which order was duly complied with.
On the 22/11/2021, this Honourable Court granted the said Application filed by the th Defendant/Respondent/Respondent.
At page 13 of the said ruling of the Court, the learned High Court Judge expressed herself as follows: “it is evident that the plaintiffs herein per their instant writ of summons before this Honourable Court are in brazen abuse of the Court process and the applicant invocation of its inherent jurisdiction of this Honourable Court to dismiss Plain