STEPHEN DESU & 1 ORS VS THE REGISTRAR-GENERAL
2018
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- JUSTICE GIFTY AGYEI ADDO,
Areas of Law
- Constitutional Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Corporate Law
2018
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Plaintiff filed an action against the Defendant for allegedly arbitrary removal of directors of a company. The court found the Plaintiff lacked the requisite capacity to sue on behalf of other directors and failed to prove the arbitrary and unfair actions claimed. The Plaintiff's action was dismissed.
The Plaintiff instituted this action on 4th July, 2018, against the Defendant for the following reliefs:
a. A Declaration that the purported deletion of the names of Arku-Korsah Anthony, Nureeden Anderson, Dennis Buaben, Fiifi Esuman-Arthur and Oblitey Commey Gideon as Directors of the 2nd Plaintiff by the Defendant represents the grossest abuse of the powers conferred on it by Articles 23 and 296 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana and therefore null and void of no effect whatsoever and by parity of reasoning the said persons’ names ought to be restored as Directors of the 2nd Plaintiff.
b. Punitive damages for the Defendant’s arbitrary and capricious and unreasonable use of power vested in it by the Constitution and the laws of Ghana.
c. The immediate deletion of the names of the fraudsters i.e. Akubire Mbena Sampson, Richard Siaw, Tetteh Israel, Opoku Baffour Gloria, Amobil John and
Musah Yusif Nashirudeen as Directors of the 2nd Plaintiff as they are matter of fact fictitious directors.
d. Such further or other order(s) as in the circumstances may be just including in particular a perpetual injunction restraining the Defendant whether by itself or its servants, agents and privies whomsoever or otherwise howsoever from in any manner interfering with the legitimate duties of the accredited Directors of the 2nd Plaintiff since its incorporation in 2010.
e. Punitive costs inclusive of Counsel’s fees.
The Plaintiffs’ case is found in paragraphs 4 to 8 of their Statement of Claim, summation of which is as follows:
According to the 1st Plaintiff, he is a teacher by profession and a founding member, a director as well as a signatory to the accounts of the 2nd Plaintiff, a company limited by guarantee, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1963, (Act 179).
The 1st Plaintiff further states that he sues on his own behalf as a director of the 2nd Plaintiff and also for and on behalf of other legitimate, accredited directors of the 2nd Plaintiff who have been illegally removed by the Defendant through the fraudulent actions of self-imposed members of the board of directors of the 2nd Plaintiff.
Also according to the Plaintiffs, the 2nd Plaintiff was incorporated in the year 2010. That the affairs of the 2nd Plaintiff have since incorporation been steered under the able leadership of its board of directors and officers who effectively discharge their functions and responsibilities to the admiration of all.
It is the case of the Plaintiffs that in