HUAGO and Others v DJANGMAH II and Others

Edward Wiredu JSC. In two judgments dated 9 August 1990 the judicial committee of the Greater Accra Regional House of Chiefs delivered its decisions in suits Nos GARP 3/84 and GARP3/85. The two suits were consolidated and tried together.

In suit No GARP/3/85 one Nene Tei Djangmah IX and another in a petition challenged the status of one Samuel Nari Osrogbo alias Nene Osrogbo Djangmah II as the paramount chief of the Great Ningo Traditional Area. The judgment of the judicial committee in this suit dismissed the said petition and affirmed the status of Nene Osrogbo Djangmah II as the occupant of the paramount stool of the Great Ningo Traditional Area. An appeal against this decision by Nene Tei Djangmah IX to the National House of Chiefs could not be pursued because the petitioner/appellants were unable to fulfill the conditions of appeal. Their application to the National House of Chiefs for extension of time within which to fulfill the appeal conditions was refused on 28 July 1995.

In suit No GARP/3/84, the judicial committee dismissed a petition by Nene O.;rogabo Djangmah II and others who have sought in their petition a declaration that he, Nene Djangmah II, was still the undisputed paramount chief of the Great Ningo Traditional Area and therefore the occupant of that stool. The respondents to the said petition, who are the present appellants before this court, resisted the petition on the ground that the first respondent had abdicated from the stool. It is from the judgment in that case that Nene Osrogbo Djangmah II and others considered themselves aggrieved, and appealed to the National House of Chiefs and succeeded in having that decision against them overturned by the judicial committee of that house in a judgment dated 15 September 1995. It is from this latter judgment that the present appeal has been brought to this court.

The present appeal is therefore solely concerned with the reversal of the decision in suit No GARP/3/85 by the judicial committee of the National House of Chiefs. We thus have two judgments, one in favour of the present appellants delivered by the Greater Accra Regional House of Chiefs dated 9 August 1990 and the other by the judicial committee of the National House of Chiefs dated 15 September 1995 in favour of the respondents.

Even though in terms of hierarchy the decision of the National House of Chiefs is more authoritative and therefore is to be preferred to that of the Greater Accra Regional House of Chi