No judgement debt in Heritage Imperial Ltd vrs. Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources

Godfred Yeboah Dame

November 11, 2021

The Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Godfred Dame said the government has nit incurred any judgement debt in the Heritage Imperial Ltd vs. Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources case.

“There 1s no arbitral award of Fifteen Million United States Dollars (USS$1Sm) against the Republic of Ghana in the above-mentioned case. There has never been such arbitral award.

There is also no award of the sum of USS15m as judgement debt in any dispute between the parties stated above in action filed in court”

Responding to the Member of Parliament for South Dayi, Mr. Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor’s question on what circumstances led to the arbitral award of US$15m against the nation in the case of Heritage Imperial Ltd vrs Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources and Attorney-General with suit No.CI/34/2019.

According to him, on 30th July, 2021, the High Court Kumasi presided over by Justice Diawuo upheld the application by the Atteney-General and set aside the judgment entered by the court over a year ago.

“Thus, there is no judgement debt against the Government of Ghana as contained in the question of the Honourable Member. I understand an appeal has been filed by the company but the effect remains that, there is no judgement against the State. At the time, the question was filed, Mr. Speaker, there was no judgement debt against the state.”

Facts of Suit No. C1/34/2019 — Heritage Imperial Limited vrs, 1. Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources

Sometime, in 2017, the Government of Ghana, in order to tackle the menace of illegal mining, set up an Inter-Ministerial Committee on [legal Mining To enforce its mandate, the committee was assisted by a taskforce made up of members of the security forces and Environment Protection Agency (LPA) officials. On 6″ December, 2018, the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Illegal Mining invaded Heritage Imperial Company’s mining concession and seized its equipment, machinery and monies for suspicion of being engaged in illegal mining.

Claiming that the invasion and seizure were unlawful, the company on 20% February, 2019, instituted an action for the following reliefs endorsed on its writ of summons:

Declaration that the invasion of the plaintiff’s mining site and the seizure of its excavators and equipment is unlawful.
An order directed at the defendants to release the plaintiff’s machineries, equipment and monies seized by the Taskforce of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on illegal mining from its concession.
Or in the alternative the cost of the machineries and equipment to be assessed and the value paid to the plaintiff.
General damages.
Cost of these proceedings including counsel’s fees on a full indemnity basis.

After the trial, the Court on 30 July, 2020, gave judgment as follows:

“… enter judgement for the plaintiff as follows.

Declaration that the invasion of the plaintiff’s mining Site and the seizure of its excavators and equipment is unlawful;
Recovery of the sum of USS15,304,.714.20 being the value of machinery and equipment seized from the plaintiff’s site by the Inter-ministerial task force on illegal miming on 6 December 2018 or its current value in Cedis;

¢. General damages of GHC500,000,

Costs of GHC100,000”.

The matter he said was handled by the Office of Attomey-General in Kumasi, Ashanti Region from February, 2019 until judgment was delivered in July, 2020.

Mr. Dame said on assuming office as Attorney-General, he got to know about the entry of judgment against the state in or about July, 2021 when same was being discussed on a radio programme about illegal mining popularly called “Galamsey”.

And upon enquiring about the existence of the judgment, factors accounting for its entry, he formed the view that in spite of the lapse of over one year since judgment had been entered, the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court itself could be invoked to consider the gross fundamental issues affecting the jurisdiction of the Court over the conduct of the action. One 13^th July, 2021, I invoked the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court for an order setting aside the judgment which had been entered in July, 2020.

Grounds for the challenge

“Our contention was that the commencement of the action by plaintiff without regard to the mandatory statutory stipulations of the State Proceedings Act, 1998 (Act 555), was unlawful.

Further, that, the order for payment by the Government of Ghana of the sum of US$15.304,714.20 was manifestly unlawful and without basis, as no endorsement on the writ of summons issued in the action supported same. The rules of court require a writ of summons to be indorsed with a concise statement of the nature of the claim made, or the relief or remedy required in the action.

However, in no part of either the writ of summons or the pleadings of the respondent did the respondent claim the sum of US$15.304,714.20 against the applicant herein. The Court thus did not have jurisdiction to grant the relief of US$15,304,714.20.

Further, the failure of plaintiff to claim the relief of (US$15,304 714.20 on its writ of summons was clearly intended to deceiver the Court and avoid the payment of appropriate filing fees. The act of the plaintiff in concealing the specific cost of the equipment it alleged to have acquired, was one calculated at overreaching not only the Court but also the Government of Ghana, and therefore ought not to be rewarded by a court of law and equity.”

Dominic Shirimori/Ghanamps.com