Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
August 16, 2023
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
On 26th June 2023, this Court dismissed two applications which have been filed by the Defendants/Applicants (hereinafter called the Applicants) in this case.
The two applications were motion to set aside an auction sale and motion to relist an application for review of reserve price of attached property.
Afterwards, the Applicants filed the present application on 11th July 2023. The present application is praying the Court to stay the execution of the order which was made on 26th June 2023 dismissing the two applications pending the determination of an appeal filed by the Applicants.
The motion was fixed for hearing on 24th October, 2023. However, the case came before this Court on 31st July, 2023 in respect of an application for release of money paid into Court.
The said motion was filed by the Plaintiff/Respondent (hereinafter called the Respondent). The said motion could not be heard because of the Applicants motion which was filed on 11th July, 2023 and fixed for 24th October, 2023. The Court therefore invoked Order 1 Rule 1 (2), Order 37 Rule 2 and Order 80 Rule 4 (2)of C. I. 47 and abridged the date for the hearing of the Applicants motion to today, 16th August, 2023. The Court ordered the Respondent counsel to serve the Applicants and or their counsel with the Court notes and hearing notice for today’s proceedings.
The Order was complied with by the Respondent on 8th August, 2023 as per the affidavit of service which was commissioned by the Registrar of this Court on 9th August, 2023. Today, the Applicants and their counsel are not in Court to move their motion filed on 11th July, 2023. The Respondent has filed affidavit in opposition to the motion.
I will therefore consider the Applicants application based on the documents filed in support and in opposition to same.
After all, the law allows a Court to consider the merits of an application and decide whether to grant it or refuse it once the documents filed are before the Court.
Therefore, a Court can grant or refuse an application without the application being moved formally.
See REPUBLIC v COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA EX PARTE: EASTERN ALLOY COMPANY LIMITED [2007-2008] 1 SCGLR 371 I have considered the documents filed for and against the application for the Stay of Execution filed by the Applicants.
It is trite law, that Stay of Execution would be granted on exceptional circumstances.
This is because; it is not the practice of the Courts to deny victorious parties the fruits of their victo
AI Generated Summary
Justice Francis Obiri of the High Court addressed a post-judgment application arising after the court, on 26 June 2023, had dismissed two motions by the Defendants/Applicants relating to an auction sale and the reserve price of attached property. The Applicants filed an appeal and, on 11 July 2023, sought a stay of execution pending that appeal. To accommodate a Plaintiff/Respondent motion for release of funds paid into court, the judge abridged the hearing date under C.I. 47 and fixed the stay motion for 16 August 2023, with service effected on the Applicants. Despite their absence, the court proceeded on the papers, reaffirming that motions may be decided without formal moving. Applying Supreme Court authority, the judge held that stays of execution issue only in exceptional circumstances and found none in the Applicants’ filings. The application was dismissed, costs of GH¢5,000 were awarded against the Applicants, and payment was ordered before any fresh step, citing Court of Appeal authority.