ANDREWS NARH - BI & ORS v. ASAFOATSE KWETEY AKORSORKU III

AMADU JSC:-

INTRODUCTION:

(1)This appeal emanates from the judgment of the Court of Appeal dated 20th May, 2021 wherein the Court of Appeal reversed the decision of the High Court, Land Division-Accra, dated 27th February, 2019 in favour of the Plaintiff/Appellant/ Respondent/Cross/Appellant. For purposes of consistency, the parties shall bear the designations assigned them at the Trial Court, simply as “Defendants and Plaintiff”.

(2)The appeal, though straight-forward in terms of the substantive issues for determination is however shrouded in various technicalities from the Trial High Court to this court. As a court of last resort, this court has always been circumspect in determining cases without sacrificing substance on the alter of technicalities unless the technical issue raised is of a kind which is indisputably fatal to proceedings and manifestly unanswerable on the peculiar facts of each case and relevant law.

(3)The issues arising for determination in this appeal rest on three key areas: capacity/locus standi; ownership of the land, the subject matter in dispute as well as allegations of bias against one of the justices of the Court of Appeal, the latter which in our view ought not to be relevant to the instant appeal but which could have been raised by the invocation of the appropriate jurisdiction of this court for the consequential remedy. We shall however address that ground shortly.

(4)Intriguingly, while these crucial issues for determination are not difficult to identify, the Defendants have anchored their appeal on a myriad of as many as twelve (12) grounds most of which contravene the mandatory rules of this court on the proper formulation of grounds of appeal. The grounds of appeal as set out in the Defendants’ notice of appeal are as follows:

a.The judgment of the Court of Appeal is against the weight of evidence placed before it.

b.His Lordship Justice P. Bright Mensah J.A wrongly exercised his judicial discretion by not only accepting to sit as an appellate judge over the same case he partly handled at the trial Court, and with the Trial Court’s influence or bias, went ahead to write the lead judgment of the Court of Appeal which the other two judges only agreed or concurred to.

c.The Learned Lordships of the Court of Appeal unfortunately failed to consider the totality of the evidence of Defendants/ Respondents/Appellants which occasioned substantial miscarriage of justice.

d.The court erred in law when it admitted Asafoats