Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
February 20, 1976
HIGH COURT
GHANA
JUDGMENT OF EDUSEI J.
This is an application by the plaintiff under Order 14 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (LN 140A), for summary judgment. The defendant has vehemently opposed it, and contended further that the action is not maintainable in this jurisdiction. The plaintiff's specially endorsed writ of summons reads as follows:
"The plaintiff's claim is for ¢3,182.61 (£1,187.56) being the balance due from the defendant to the plaintiff under a judgment entered in the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, England, on 7 March 1967 against the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. . .
PARTICULARS
Judgment debt .. .. .. .. £3,022.69 ¢8,100.76
Add costs .. .. .. .. .. 33.47 89.66
Less payments in deduction of judgment
debt since 7 March 1967 .. .. .. 1,868.60 5,007.81
The plaintiff also claims interest on the said balance of ¢3,182.61 (£1,187.56) at the rate of ten per cent per annum calculated from 7 March 1967 to date of final payment under and by virtue of the Judgments Act, 1838 (1 & 2 Vict., c. 110)."
The defendant entered a conditional appearance to the writ. In her supporting affidavit the plaintiff after reciting the claim as set out in the writ of summons and the conditional entry of appearance by the defendant concluded in paragraphs (5) and (6) as follows:
[p.357]
"(5) That I believe that the defendant has no defence to this action.
(6) Wherefore I swear to this affidavit in support of an application for liberty to enter judgment against the defendant for the sum claimed with costs and interest."
The defendant in his affidavit has given the reasons which, in his opinion, render the claim not maintainable in this jurisdiction and he is relying on various provisions of Part V of the Courts Act, 1971 (Act 372). Part V of the Act deals with the "Enforcement In Ghana of Foreign Judgments and Maintenance Orders."
It does appear from the opposing affidavit that the plaintiff through her counsel registered the judgment of the High Court of England in the High Court of Ghana on 15 October 1973. This judgment was subsequently set aside on the application of the defendant on the ground of lapse of time. A copy of the court's ruling dated 31 January 1974 is attached to the affidavits in opposition.
It is quite clear from the ruling that the application for the registration of the judgment was made on 3 October 1973, and this clearly offended the provisions of section 77 (1) of the Courts Act, 1971 (Act 372), and the ju
AI Generated Summary
Edusei J. of the High Court of Ghana considered an application for summary judgment on a specially endorsed writ by a plaintiff seeking to recover the balance due under a judgment of the High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, England, dated 7 March 1967. The defendant entered a conditional appearance and opposed the application, contending the action was not maintainable under the Courts Act, 1971 (Act 372). The plaintiff had previously registered the English judgment in Ghana on 15 October 1973, but that registration was set aside on 31 January 1974 because the application was filed beyond the six-year period prescribed by section 77(1), and thus was set aside under section 78(1). The court held that section 80 permits enforcement only by registration and bars fresh suits to recover sums under foreign judgments. Section 81(1)’s recognition rule was inapplicable due to section 81(2). Finding no statutory power to extend time, the court set aside the writ and made no order as to costs.