Eskwai logo
Verify now as a student, judge or newly called lawyer for access to discounted plans.

ADORSU AND OTHERS v. SOKPOLI

March 11, 1983

HIGH COURT

GHANA

CORAM

  • APATU-PLANGE J

Areas of Law

  • Civil Procedure

AI Generated Summary

In the Ghanaian High Court, the defendants applied on 28 May 1982 for an order requiring the plaintiff to furnish substantial security for costs or enter a bond with sufficient sureties, invoking the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (L.N. 140A). The plaintiff challenged the applications form, arguing that because it was filed after the summons for directions stage, Order 30, r. 5 required it to be brought by summons and thus the motion was incompetent. The defendants responded that Order 65 is silent on form and that Order 52, r. 1 permits applications to a judge in court by motion, warning against procedural absurdities. The judge reviewed definitions of motions and summonses, observed that Ghana lacks masters in chambers so all applications are heard in court, and concluded that the motion label does not affect regularity. Alternatively, the court could treat the application as a summons under Order 70, r. 1 without prejudice. The objection was overruled.

JUDGMENT