JOHN AMONOO-NEIZER v. MR. KWADWO NYARKO ACKAH & ORS
May 26, 2022
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- ANGELINA M. DOMAKYAAREH (MRS.) JA. (PRESIDING)
- A. B. POKU-ACHEAMPONG, JA.
- SAMUEL K.A. ASIEDU, JA.
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
May 26, 2022
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Court of Appeal, constituted by Justices Samuel K.A. Asiedu (authoring), Angelina M. Domakyaareh (presiding), and A.B. Poku-Acheampong, reviewed an interlocutory appeal arising from the Circuit Court, Kumasi’s refusal to permit amendment of a joint defence in litigation over Property No. 401 OTB Adum, Kumasi. Plaintiff Kwadwo Nyarko Ackah sought declarations of family ownership, possession, ejectment of John Amonoo-Neizer, and injunctive relief. The 2nd defendant changed counsel after shared counsel with the 1st defendant pleaded fraud against the 2nd defendant’s father in the joint defence, raising conflict-of-interest and fairness concerns. The amendment application, supported by an 18-paragraph affidavit, was unopposed yet refused on delay and prejudice grounds. Emphasizing constitutional fairness, procedural rules allowing amendments at any stage, and case law guiding appellate interference with discretion, the Court set aside the refusal, granted leave to amend within fourteen days, and made no order as to costs.
ASIEDU, JA.
This is an interlocutory appeal by the 2nd Defendant/Appellant herein against the ruling of the Circuit Court, Kumasi delivered on the 22nd day of July 2019.
FACTS:
The facts of this case are that, on the 16th of May 2016, Kwadwo Nyarko Ackah, the Plaintiff in this matter, for himself and on behalf of his maternal family, issued a writ of summons against the Defendants namely: Madam Gifty Annan, the 1st Defendant; John Amonoo-Neizer, the 2nd Defendant and George Asonaba Boadu, the 3rd Defendant herein. In the writ, which was accompanied by a statement of claim, the Plaintiff claims against the Defendants:
1. Declaration that property numbered 401 OTB Adum, Kumasi is the Plaintiffs maternal family (sic).
2. Recovery of possession.
3. An order of the court ejecting 2nd Defendant from the said property.
4. Perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants, their relatives, assigns, workmen and all who claim through them from having anything to do with the disputed property.
5. Cost
6. Any further or other order(s) as the court may deem fit.
After the service of the writ on the Defendants, Kwamena Fynn-Aikins esq. filed an Appearance on the 2nd June 2016, for and on behalf of the 1st and the 2nd Defendants and later, a statement of defence; whilst, Francis Koffie esq. also filed an Appearance on the 9th June 2016, on behalf of the 3rd Defendant and later his statement of defence. In the course of the trial, the 2nd Defendant realized that his interest was not being properly represented by Kwamena Fynn-Aikins esq. the lawyer for both the 1st and the 2nd Defendants. The 2nd Defendant therefore engaged another lawyer in the person of Anna Fordjour of AB & DAVID LAW who filed a Notice of Change of Solicitor on the 15th day of August 2018. Then, on the 5th July 2019, the 2nd Defendant caused to be filed, on his behalf, a motion on notice for leave to amend the joint statement of defence filed for and on behalf of the 2nd Defendant. This motion was filed with an 18-paragraph affidavit in support. The motion was moved on the 22nd July 2019 and dismissed by the trial Circuit Judge. On the 1st day of August 2019, counsel filed a motion on notice for leave of the Circuit Court to appeal against the decision pronounced on the 22nd July 2019. This motion was fixed for and indeed heard and granted by the Circuit Judge on the 19th August 2019. A notice of appeal was therefore filed on the 29th August 2019.
RELIEFS & GROUNDS OF APPEAL:
The 2nd Def