Try asking the following...
JUDGMENT
This ruling is in respect of an application filed by counsel for the defendants,
hereinafter known as the applicant, praying the court to set aside the writ of summons
filed by the plaintiff, hereinafter called the respondent and for any further orders as
the court deems fit.
Per the affidavit attached to the motion paper, the applicant informs the court that
though the respondent's writ is seeking to set aside a judgment of the High Court, it
has other reliefs attached to it, which amounts to re-litigating the case, which had
already been determined. He stated that the writ is highly irregular, a nullity and sins
against statute, and unknown to all rules of practice and procedure. He also submits
that the writ is an abuse of the court process and must be dismissed.
In his submission before the court, counsel for the applicant argued that the case
travelled from the High Court to the Court of Appeal, but the respondent's father,
who instituted the action and lost, did not appeal the decision. He further submitted
that the writ failed to properly evoke the jurisdiction of the court because, per the law,
no other relief should be endorsed on the writ when a judgment is being impugned
on grounds of fraud. Thus since there are other reliefs on the writ of summons, this
court lacks jurisdiction to hear the matter. He also submitted that the affidavit in
opposition failed to state how the other reliefs are to be tried. He relied on the case
of Bimpong Buta v G.L.C. [2003/2004] SCGLR 1200 on the issue of jurisdiction. He
stated that the writ seeks to re-litigate all the issues that could have been raised before
the High Court or Court of Appeal and sins against the doctrine of res judicata as laid
down in Henderson vs Henderson and re-echoed in the case of Sasu v Amua Sekyi
[2003/2004] SCGLR 742 per Date-Bah J.S.C. as he then was. He further submitted that
having added the reliefs of general damages and injunction, it sins against statutes
unknown to the rules, thereby invoking the court's jurisdiction to re-litigate the
matter. He also relied on the case of Osei Yaw Ennin vs Stanbic Bank Ltd unreported
Civil Appeal No J4/72/2018 dated 30th January 2019, where the Supreme Court stated
that the High Court has the power to set aside a judgment on grounds of fraud, but it
does not entitle them to re-litigate the matter. He also stated that the particulars of the
alleged fraud have not been explicitly stated in the statement of claim