Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
February 20, 2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
RULING
In this application, the defendant/applicant (hereinafter referred to as the applicant) is praying the court to set aside the default judgment obtained against it. The plaintiff/respondent (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) never filed an affidavit in response to the motion. However, counsel for the respondent made an oral submission on a point of law.
Counsel for the respondent submitted among other things that the process before the court is void because counsel does not have a valid license for the current year as the license endorsed on the process covers only 2018. Counsel also submitted that there is no chamber registration number endorsed on the process and that affects the validity of the process as well.
It is provided under section 8 (1) of the Legal Profession Act, 1960, Act 32 as follows:
"A person, other than the Attorney-General, or an officer of Attorney-General’s department, shall not practice as a solicitor unless that person has in respect of that practice a valid annual solicitor’s license issued by the Council duly stamped and in the form set out in the Second Schedule."
In the case of Henry Nuertey Korboe v Francis Amosa, unreported, Suit No. J4/56/2014, Supreme Court, Accra 21/04/2016, the Supreme Court, by a majority decision, affirmed its earlier ruling in Republic v High Court, Accra; Ex Parte Teriwajah and Henry Nuertey Korboe (REISS & CO GHANA LIMITED) (INTERESTED PARTY) which also bothered on section 8(1) of the Legal Profession Act 1960 (Act 32). By that majority decision, a solicitor who is not qualified to practice within a time frame is prohibited by section 8 of Act 32 to practice, and any process filed without a license should not be given any effect in law. In REPUBLIC v COURT OF APPEAL; EX-PARTE: DAKPEMA ZOBOGNAA & Others (LANDS COMMISSION – INTERESTED PARTY) – Unreported judgment of the Supreme Court dated 5th June 2018, the Supreme Court clarified the position of the law when it held that the mere non-endorsement of a lawyer’s Solicitor’s license on the motion paper did not render the application a nullity. For one to succeed on such a point, he should establish that at the time the motion was prepared and filed by counsel, he had no Solicitor’s license to practice as a lawyer.
On the face of the motion, a 2018 solicitor’s license was endorsed on the motion by counsel for the applicant. When same was challenged no response came from counsel. This implies that counsel has conceded to the point and
AI Generated Summary
DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE, J, ruled on an application in which the defendant, as applicant, sought to set aside a default judgment. The plaintiff/respondent filed no affidavit in opposition but raised a point of law orally. Relying on section 8(1) of the Legal Profession Act, 1960 (Act 32) and Supreme Court authority, the respondent’s counsel argued the motion was void because applicant’s counsel lacked a valid license for the filing year; the motion bore an endorsement of only a 2018 license and no chamber registration number. The court emphasized that while mere non-endorsement is not itself fatal, a filing by an unlicensed solicitor is ineffective. As applicant’s counsel did not rebut the challenge, the court inferred absence of a valid license at filing. Holding the motion incompetent, the court refused to reach service or default-judgment merits and made no order as to costs.