July 16, 2022
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Justice Dennis Dominic Adjei, JA, writing for the Court of Appeal, dismissed an interlocutory appeal by the 1st Defendant challenging the High Court (Commercial Division), Accra’s order preserving thirty percent of revenues from production at the Sankofa oil field, net of royalties and statutory payments. The underlying suit by the Plaintiff/Respondent sought compliance with a 9 April 2020 directive of the Minister of Energy to unitise the Sankofa and Afina fields, cooperation in joint production, detailed accounts since 2009, payment of profits on account, and indemnity costs. The defendants’ capacity challenges had been rejected. On appeal, the Court found the appellant misquoted the order and clarified that preservation secures the subject matter without halting operations. Applying American Cyanamid, Vanderpuye, Owusu v Owusu‑Ansah, and General Development Ltd, and Order 25 rule 2(4), the Court held the order judicious, with no undue hardship because statutory obligations remain unaffected. US authorities addressing final decisions were inapt, and Article 257(6) did not bar the plaintiff’s asserted interest. The appeal was dismissed.
DENNIS ADJEI, J.A
This is an interlocutory appeal filed against the ruling of the High Court (Commercial Division) Accra delivered on 25th June, 2021 to this Court to overturn the said ruling of the High Court and maintain the status quo ante. The background to the appeal is that the Plaintiff/ Respondent sued the Defendants for the following reliefs in the High Court on 10th July, 2020:
“(i) An order directed at Defendants to comply with the directive
issued by the Minister of Energy in his letter of 9th April, 2020
and enter into an agreement forthwith with the Plaintiff to
produce and develop the accumulation of the petroleum in the
Sankofa and Afina fields as a single unit.
(ii) An order directed at Defendants to co- operate with Plaintiff to produce and develop the accumulation of petroleum in its Sankofa and Afina fields as one unit.
(iii) An order directed at Defendants to render accounts to the Plaintiff in respect of all costs and proceeds received by Defendants for its exploration and production activities in Defendants’ Sankofa field from the year 2009, when Defendants commenced exploration of the said field till date.
(iv) An order that any income, profits on other finds due Plaintiff from Defendants exploration and production activities in the Sankofa fields be paid to the Plaintiff upon taking such on account.
(v) Cost on a full indemnity basis.”
The Plaintiff attached to its writ a 49 paragraph statement of claim to justify the basis of its claim against the Defendants. The Plaintiff further filed an application ex parte for preservation of all funds, revenue, monies earned, paid to and/or accruing to Defendants from the exploration and petroleum products by the Defendants from the Sankofa field.
The 1st Defendant upon service of the Plaintiff’s writ of summons and the statement of claim applied to the High Court to dismiss the Plaintiff’s action for want of capacity. The 2nd Defendant subsequently filed a similar application to dismiss the Plaintiff’s action for want of capacity. The High Court dismissed both applications on different days and held that the Plaintiff has capacity to maintain its action against the Defendants. The 1st Defendant subsequently filed its 224 paragraph statement of defence and further counterclaimed against the Plaintiff that it is not entitled to any of the reliefs endorsed on the Plaintiff’s statement of claim. From the records, the 2nd Defendant also applied to the High Court for leave to file its