THE REPUPLIC v. COUNTY HOSPITAL
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- ANGELINA M. DOMAKYAAREH (MRS.) J A (PRESIDING)
- ALEX B. POKU-ACHEAMPONG, J A
- SAMUEL K. A. ASIEDU, J A
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Constitutional Law
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Court of Appeal decision arises from County Hospital Ltd’s litigation against the Electricity Company of Ghana Ltd (ECG), begun in August 2016 to challenge an allegedly arbitrary GH¢100,000 bill, repeated disconnections, and to secure injunctive relief. The High Court granted an interim injunction restraining ECG from cutting power to the hospital. After the suit was struck out for want of prosecution in July 2019, ECG disconnected the facility in November 2019 and January 2020. The Appellant then sought to commit ECG Board members and officers for contempt and to surcharge costs. The High Court found contempt unproved beyond reasonable doubt and awarded GH¢27,000 costs. On appeal, the Court of Appeal reaffirmed the prerequisites for contempt, held that personal service on corporate officers is mandatory before committal, and that an injunction cannot subsist without a pending action. It rejected fresh evidence introduced without leave, found the omnibus “weight of evidence” ground misconceived, upheld joint affidavits properly sworn by all respondents, accepted the COVID-19 context for absence, and dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court’s ruling.
DOMAKYAAREH (MRS.), JA:
[1] This is an appeal against the judgment of the High court, Kumasi dated 8th July, 2020 in a Contempt Application. In the substantive case, the Appellant herein brought an action against the Electricity Company of Ghana Ltd. (ECG), Kumasi on 4th August, 2016. The Appellant claimed the following reliefs endorsed on the Writ of Summons, namely: -
a) A declaration that the demand by the Defendant for the Plaintiff to pay an amount of GH¢100,000.00 as electricity bill for the period of January - June 2016 is wrongful, unlawful, arbitrary and ought to be curtailed by the Honourable Court.
b) A declaration that the multiple disconnections of electricity supply by defendant at the plaintiff’s premises in the face of a pending complaint before the Public Utilities Regulatory Commission is unlawful, illegal and infringes the law.
c) General, special, punitive and exemplary damages for the Defendant’s unjustified and illegal conduct.
d) An order of injunction restraining the Defendant, its agents, privies, representatives, assigns, workmen, technicians and other persons aligned to it in every manner whatsoever from in any manner threatening or actually seeking to curtail electricity supply to the Plaintiff by reason of the said arbitrary and unjustified demand and from making any further demand for the payment of the said amount by the Plaintiff.
e) SUCH FURTHER ORDER(S) as the Honourable Court may deem fit.
[2] During the pendency of the matter, the Appellant herein who was the representative of the Plaintiff in the substantive suit, filed an Ex parte application on 9th August, 2016 for an order of Interim Injunction to restrain the ECG from cutting/withholding electricity supply to the Appellants’ facility during the pendency of the suit. This application was granted by the trial court on 30th November, 2016 in these terms: “I therefore grant the application for interim injunction against the defendant restraining the latter from cutting electricity to the Plaintiff’ Hospital.
Order accordingly.” See page 11 of the Record of Appeal.
The Order for the Interlocutory Injunction was subsequently drawn up on 1st December, 2016 in these terms: -
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the defendant be and is hereby restrained from cutting/ withholding electricity to the Plaintiff’s facility. No order as to costs.
Order accordingly.” See page 8 of the Record of Appeal.
[3] The proximate antecedent to this appeal is that the Appellant herein