Customer Support

QUANSAH
V.
TETTEH AND ANOTHER

(1993) JELR 66591 (CA)

Court of Appeal 3 Jun 1993 Ghana
BriefBot icon

BriefBot Summary

Free

- The Court of Appeal held that the burden of proving residence and principal place of business rests on the party asserting such facts, especially where those facts are peculiarly within their knowledge (Evidence Decree 1975, s.11). - The

Case Details

Judges:ESSIEM JA, AMUAH JA, LUTTERODT JA
Counsel:E B ODURO FOR THE APPELLANT; L OTOO FOR THE RESPONDENT.
Other Citations:[1992-93] 2 GBR 910 – 914

LUTTERODT JA.

On 5 May 1992, the plaintiff-appellant through her solicitors issued a writ against the two defendants for the following reliefs:

“(a) A declaration that plaintiff is a shareholder of the 2nd defendant company;

(b) A declaration that the purported re-distribution of shares reducing plaintiff’s shares from 500 to 100 was irregularly and fraudulently done and accordingly null and void and of no legal effect;

(c) An order setting aside the purported reduction of plaintiff’s shares in the 2nd defendant company from 500 to 100.

(d) An order for the valuation of the 2nd defendant company, for plaintiff to be paid off the value of her shares in the said company.”

On being served with the writ, the defendants caused their solicitors firstly, to enter conditional appearance on their behalf and followed it with a motion for the transfer of the suit from Cape Coast to Accra. The main ground on which the application was founded was that both defendants resided and carried on business in A…

There's more. Sign in to continue reading.

judy.legal is the comprehensive database of case law and legislation from Ghana, Kenya and Nigeria. Gain seamless access to over 77,000 cases, recent judgments, statutes, and rules of court.