Try asking the following...
RULING
This is a Motion on Notice to Stay Execution of the Judgment of this Court pending the Setting Aside of the Judgment of the Court dated 4th June, 2020 under the inherent jurisdiction of the Court.
This was filed on behalf of the Defendants/Judgment/Debtors/Applicants (hereinafter referred to as Applicants).
The main ground for the instant application is that none of the Exhibits attached to the Witness Statement of Edward Gash who testified on behalf of Plaintiff was stamped as required by the Stamp Duty Act and that the relevant authentication of the documentation was also overlooked.
That because none of the documents was stamped; this rendered the said documents inadmissible irrespective of whether or not the Applicants were present during the trial.
The grounds for opposing the instant application is that Applicants have not established any exceptional circumstances to warrant a grant of a Stay of Execution.
That a Court does not have jurisdiction to Set Aside its own Judgment on the sole basis that a document that was required to be stamped was not stamped.
I have carefully considered the submissions made by both Counsel in moving and in opposing the instant application as well as the authorities cited by Learned Counsel on both sides.
In the case of Theophilus Teiko Tagoe & Anor. Vrs. Dr. Prempeh & Anor. Civil Appeal No. J4/29/2022 delivered on 26th April, 2023, the SC per Asiedu JSC, held that although Exhibit ‘A’ which required stamping but was unstamped was rejected by the Court of Appeal, there was sufficient evidence on record to sustain the Judgment which had been entered for Plaintiff/Respondent.
The Learned Judge further held that the admission in evidence of an unstamped document shall not be the sole basis to reverse a Judgment.
He referred to Section 109 of the Courts Act 1993 (Act, 459) as amended provides as follows:
“Wrong Ruling as to stamping where an objection is taken in a Court to the admissibility of a document in evidence on the ground of absence or insufficiency of a stamp, the decision of the Court shall not be reversed, Set Aside or otherwise interfered with by reason only of a Ruling of the Court that the document requires a stamp or that the stamp on the document is insufficient or because the document requires a stamp”.
In the instant application, aside Applicants’ challenge with the Exhibits attached to Plaintiff’s representative Witness Statement not being stamped, Applicants stated that the relevant authentica