ZEN PETROLEUM LIMITED vs FGR BOGOSO PRESTEA LIMITED

Counsel for Plaintiff: My Lady, I have a preliminary legal objection to some depositions in the affidavit in support of the application. My objection is in relation to paragraphs ‘18 to 46’ of the affidavit in support. My issue is that the said depositions sins against Order 20 Rule 8 and 9 of C.I. 47- reads out. My argument is that the said paragraphs are not depositions relating to facts but are legal arguments which has been canvassed with the affidavit in support. The case of Ibrahim v Abubakari [2001-2002] 1GLR page 540. The Court held that like pleadings, affidavit deposed to facts or material facts. In addition I would like to refer to the case of Ammidu (No. 5) v AG, Waterville Holdings (BVI) Limited and Woyome (No. 3) [2015-2016}2 SCRLR page 1195. In the said case, the court held, ‘the court may order to be struck out from any affidavit any matter which is scandalous, irrelevant or otherwise oppressive’. I pray that the depositions be struck out.

Counsel for Defendant: My Lady, we are opposed to the preliminary legal objection. Our argument is based on Order 20 Rule 8 (2) of C.I.47- read out. On a reading of a said rule, a deponent of an affidavit can deposed to any information being it factual or legal provided that, the deponent states the source of the information and the grounds of the belief. Like a pleading, an affidavit is to put the opponent on notice of the deponent’s case. In the said deposition referred to by the respondent, the applicant rightfully stated the source of the information in the respective paragraphs. In the Ammidu case cited by the respondent, the deponent in that affidavit failed to state the source of information in the affidavit. It is on that reason that the Supreme Court dismissed those depositions. To conclude, since the applicant has provided the source of the depositions in the affidavit, it complies with Order 20 Rule 8(2) of CI. 47. We pray that the objection is refused.

Counsel for Plaintiff: My Lady, my argument is not in relation to the disclosure of the source of information but rather that, even if the source of information is disclosed, it should be only on factual matters and not legal arguments.

RULING

I have heard the preliminary legal objection raised by Counsel for the Defendant and I have also heard the response from the Applicant. The Court is of the view that those paragraphs are all legal arguments which cannot be countenanced in an affidavit.

The Court will strike out those paragraphs (pa