ADWOA OWUSUWAA v. NANA ADU AMEYAW & ORS
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- Justice Francis Obiri
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
On November 16, 2016, the court dismissed the respondent's preliminary objections regarding jurisdiction and timeliness of a motion for review filed by the applicants. The court confirmed that it has the power to review its own decisions and that the motion was filed within the allowed 14-day period. The injunction order originally granted against the applicants was declared null and void due to the improper service of the writ of summons, thereby setting the injunction aside. This ruling underscores the importance of proper service and adherence to procedural timelines in judicial processes.
RULING
On 23-06-2016, the defendants/applicants hereinafter called the applicants filed a motion on notice for review of a decision of this Court dated 14th June 2016. The said decision was given by this Court differently constituted and presided over by his Lordship Justice Paul Richardson who is now on retirement.
The motion filed on 14th June 2016 was in respect of the court refusal to set aside an order of interim injunction it granted against the applicants, their agents, servants, assigns, privies etc and any other person whatsoever called from in any way trespassing, alienating, disposing of, or granting any interest, right or title or dealing with the land in dispute in anyway until the final determination of the case. The injunction order was made on 15th March 2016.
When the motion for review by the applicants came up for hearing on 16th November 2016, before me, Counsel for the plaintiff/respondent hereinafter called the respondent raised a preliminary objection on point of law in respect of the competency of the motion for review by the applicant in this case.
Counsel raised two main grounds in his submission. He contended as follows:
(a) That this Court has no jurisdiction to review its decision in anyway.
In the view of the respondent's Counsel, there is no law which now allows this Court to review its decision. Therefore, the applicants’ motion for review filed on 23rd June 2016 should not be entertained by this Court.
Counsel cited the case of the Republic V High Court (Commercial Division) Tamale, Ex parte Dakpemzobogunaa Henry Kaleem (substituted by Alhaji Alhassan I Dakpema)
(Dakpemanaa Alhassan Mohammed Dawuni-Interested Party) (2015) 89 GMJ 175 SC
Learned counsel submitted that by that decision, the High Court does not have any review power under Order 42 of CI 47. Therefore, the applicant’s application should be dismissed in limine. In other words, per respondent counsel submission, this court lacks capacity to entertain the motion for review filed by the applicants.
(b) That even if this court has jurisdiction to entertain the application, the applicants application is out of time per the rules of court. Therefore, the court should not consider the merits of the application.
In opposing the preliminary legal point, counsel for the applicant submitted that, the Court has power to review its decision under C.I 47 and secondly, their application is within time per the rules of court. He also added that, the injunction order o