This is an Application by the Defendant/Applicant praying the Court for an order staying the execution of the Judgment of this Court pending the determination of an appeal lodged against the said Judgment by the Applicant.
The nucleus of this Application is simple and straight forward.
Same is captured by paragraphs 6-10 of their Supplementary Affidavit dated 23rd August, 2022 as follows:
“(6) That per Exhibit A of the Respondent’s Affidavit in Opposition, the learned Judge declared that numerous opportunities had been given to Counsel for the Defendant to call their last witness and closed the case for their failure to do so.
(7) That per the last paragraph of the Court’s Notes in the said Exhibit, the Court gave timelines for the parties to file their written submissions and adjourned for a date for Judgment.
(8) That owing to the crucial nature of the directives made in Court on that day and the effect they were likely to have had on the proceedings, it was imperative that the Court’s Notes for the day were served on the Counsel for the Defendant/Appellant. This was especially so because the Lawyers for the Defendant as well as the Defendant’s representative were both absent from Court.
(9) That per a search conducted in the Registry of this Court dated the 18th of August, 2022 and marked as Exhibit SK1 it was revealed that the Defendant was not served with the Court’s Notes of the 1st of June, 2022.
(10) That the failure to serve this Court’s documents on the Defendant lies at the root of the matter as it effectively deny the Defendant his right to a fair hearing.”
The Application was resisted by the Plaintiff/Respondent.
Counsel for the Applicant submitted that though the Court ordered for addresses to be field after closing their case they were never given the opportunity to file their written address for which same sins against the rules of natural justice.
According to Counsel though their case was closed by the Court and parties were thereafter ordered to file their written submission the said order was never served on them.
This clearly calls for an examination of the order complained of.
The order complained of reads:
“By Court: Notwithstanding many opportunities given the Defendant to call their witness from the Lands Commission they have failed/neglected to do so. Even though Counsel (Kofi Osei Owusu Esq.) was in Court when the case was adjourned to today for continuation; he is not in Court to pursue same. His junior Francis Ohem
