2022
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This High Court ruling by Her Ladyship Justice Barbara Tetteh-Charway addresses an application by Alhassan Iddrisu Alhassan for an extension of time to file judicial review proceedings. Alhassan claimed ownership of plot 97 in the North Legon Residential Area under a sublease derived from the late David Kwabena Ahenkora, whose head lease was granted by the Government of Ghana on 1 September 1986. After applying to the 1st Respondent to register his interest, he was notified by letter dated 11 July 2017—received on 23 January 2018—that Ahenkora Antwi had alleged his sublease was obtained by fraud. Relying on Order 55 rule 3 of C.I. 47 and the Supreme Court’s guidance in Republic v Wassa Fiase Traditional Council, the court held the six-month limit is generally not extendable except in special circumstances. Because Alhassan did not act promptly upon receipt of the letter, the court dismissed the application and awarded costs.
RULING
This is a Ruling on an application for extension of time to file an application for judicial review.
In the affidavit in support deposed to by Alhassan Iddrisu Alhassan, the Applicant stated that
he is the bona fide owner in possession of a parcel of land known as plot no. 97, North Legon
Residential Area. According to the Applicant, he acquired a sublease of the said parcel of land
from the late David Kwabena Ahenkora who obtained his head lease from the Government of
Ghana on 1
st September, 1986.
The Applicant further stated that he applied to the 1st Respondent to be enabled to plot and
register his interest in the said land. However, according to the Applicant, the 1
st Respondent, in
a letter dated 11th July, 2017, but which he received on 23rd January, 2018, informed him that the
late David Kwabena Ahenkora Antwi had written to inform them that the Applicant’s sublease
was obtained by fraud.
The Applicant claims that the 1st Respondent unilaterally declined to give its consent for the
registration of his sublease without giving him a hearing. The applicant further claims that the
failure of 1st Respondent to give him a hearing, entitles him to seek legal redress by way of
judicial review. However, his application has been delayed because he initially engaged the 2nd
and 3
rd respondents who are administrators of the estate of the late David Kwabena Ahenkora
in the hope of arriving at an amicable settlement. He therefore prays for extension of time to file
an application for judicial review.
In the 2
nd and 3rd Respondent’s affidavit in opposition to the application which was deposed to
by 3
rd Respondent, he stated that he had been advised by counsel that the 1st Respondent has no
power to determine an allegation of fraud and therefore it could not have given the applicant a
hearing. He further stated that he had been advised by counsel that this is not a proper case for
judicial review and therefore the application for extension of time is also improper.
LEGAL ANALYSIS AND OPINION OF COURT
Order 55 Rule 3 (1) and (2) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004, C.I 47 which
governs applications for judicial review provides that:
(1) An application for judicial review shall be made not later than six months from the date of
occurrence of the event giving grounds for making the application.
(2) Where an order of certiorari is sought in respect of any judgment, order or conviction or
proceeding, the date o