Ghana Post Company Ltd. v. James Sualah Bossman and Ms. Cecilia Foly
June 23, 2006
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- Tweneboa-Kodua, J.A. (Presiding)
- Addo, J.A.
- Quaye, J.A.
Areas of Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
June 23, 2006
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Court of Appeal (per Tweneboa-Kodua, J.A.) heard an interlocutory appeal from the High Court, Tamale, arising in interpleader proceedings over property attached to satisfy a judgment. The claimant, acting for her minor son, filed a supplementary affidavit sworn by Tahiru Dagimma, a law clerk at Halaali Chambers, asserting she used both “Cecilia Foli” and “Mrs Cecilia Bossman” and that the names referred to the same person. The plaintiff objected that the law clerk lacked capacity and personal knowledge, and that the affidavit was hearsay without disclosed sources. The High Court overruled the objection, deeming it insufficient to halt the hearing. Applying section 117 of the Evidence Decree and Order 38 rule 3, the Court of Appeal held the affidavit inadmissible because it contained hearsay and failed to disclose sources or grounds of belief, allowed the appeal, sustained the objection, and expunged the affidavit. Judges Addo, J.A., and Quaye, J.A., concurred.
TWENEBOA-KODUA, JA - This is an interlocutory appeal from the ruling of the High Court, Tamale.
The said ruling delivered on 29 April 2004 was occasioned by an objection taken by the plaintiff/appellant {simply called plaintiff hereinafter} to the admissibility of a supplementary affidavit in an interpleader claim.
The plaintiff had successfully sued the defendant and had embarked on the process of execution of the said judgment.
In that process the plaintiff had caused property in the nature of a plot of land with an uncompleted building thereon and described as Number 294, Block “B” Chogu Tepalsi at Tamale to be attached.
To the victorious plaintiff, the property belonged to the vanquished defendant.
As next friend of Prince Naamah Bossman {a minor} the claimant soon filed a notice of interpleader claim.
In the supporting affidavit, the Claimant swore that the afore-mentioned minor is the issue of the marriage between the claimant and the defendant.
The claimant, who is the respondent on appeal, also disclosed on oath the steps she took to acquire the attached property for the minor.
She supported her claim with numerous exhibits: {‘A’ to ‘1’}. On 17 February 2004, a supplementary affidavit in support of the claim in the interpleader proceedings was filed.
It had been sworn to by one Tahiru Dagimma who identified himself as the “law clerk/interpreter to Halaali Chambers, Tamale who are Solicitors for the claimant………. ”This deponent went on to swear, inter alia, as follows: “3. That I have the authority of both my employers and client to depose to this affidavit on their joint behalf, the matters deposed to having come to my knowledge in the course of discharging my lawful duties. “5. That throughout that affidavit {ie an earlier affidavit}, she described herself as ‘CECILIA FOLI. ’“6. That even though she is married to one James Suala Bossman and now bears the name ‘Mrs Cecilia Bossman’ she nevertheless also has ‘Cecilia Foli’ on some of her official and private documents. “7. That in her supporting affidavit of 16 June 2003, she inadvertently omitted to depose to the fact that she is also known as ‘Mrs Cecilia Bossman. ’“8. That the claimant now says that ‘Cecilia Foli’ and ‘Mrs Cecilia Bossman’ both refer to one and the same person. ”The plaintiff raised an objection to the foregoing depositions as being inadmissible hearsay and founded the objection on grounds as follows: -“i. That the deponent to the supplementary affidavit filed on 17 Febru