Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
May 23, 1997
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
Twene-Boa-Kodua J. On 24 July 1996 the solicitor for the plaintiffs filed a notice to admit documents and it was duly served on the solicitors for the first, second, fourth and fifth defendants. There is no evidence that the third defendant was or his solicitors were served with the notice .
On 30 July 1996, the solicitors for the served defendants gave a counter notice challenging or objecting to the notice to admit the specified document, to wit, assets declaration form dated 16 February 1988. The solicitors assigned reasons for their objection as follows:
“(1) That assets declaration forms are strict confidential declarations made under statute for specific purposes of the statute;
(2) that the said assets declarations forms mentioned in the plaintiffs’ notice are not coming from the proper custody and therefore not admissible evidence in a civil action inter partes;
(3) that the government is not a party to these proceedings and therefore the contents of the said assets declaration forms are irrelevant and not in issue between the parties herein;
(4) that under order 32, r 2(1) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (LN 140A), the plaintiffs' notice to admit document is incompetent, out of time and misconceived since the trial began on 30 April 1996" or thereabouts." Order 32, r 2 of LN,140A under which the motion was issued provides as follows:
"2. (1) Either party may by notice in writing at any time not later than nine days before the day for which the notice of trial has been given, or, if no notice of trial is required, not later than nine days after the action has been set down for trial, call upon any other party to admit any document, saving all just exceptions, and if the other party desires to challenge the authenticity of the document, he shall within six days after service of such notice, give notice that he does not admit the document and requires it to be proved at the trial.
(2) If such other party refuses or neglects to give notice of non-admission within the time prescribed in the last preceding paragraph, he shall be deemed to have admitted the document, unless the Court or a Judge otherwise orders.
(3) Where a party gives notice of non-admission within the time prescribed by the first paragraph of this Rule and the document is proved at the trial the costs of proving the document shall be paid by the party who has cha
AI Generated Summary
Twene-Boa-Kodua J ruled on an interlocutory dispute arising in a civil action concerning a notice to admit documents. On 24 July 1996, the plaintiffs filed and served a notice to admit an assets declaration form dated 16 February 1988 on the solicitors for the first, second, fourth and fifth defendants; there was no evidence of service on the third defendant. The served defendants responded on 30 July 1996 with a counter-notice objecting that the form was a confidential statutory declaration associated with the Government of Ghana and that the notice was incompetent because it was delivered after the action had been set down for trial; the trial had begun roughly on 30 April 1996. Plaintiffs argued that Order 70, r 1 could cure the tardiness. Applying Order 32, r 2(1) of LN 140A and guidance from the White Book, the court held the nine-day requirement mandatory, rejected the curative discretion under Order 70, r 1 for fundamental breaches, set aside the notice, and awarded ₦60,000 costs; the confidentiality issue was left for later.