JULIAN ADOMAKO GYIMAH AND AYUDAH INVESTMENT LTD. v. ZENITH BANK AND JOSEPH KWAME ESSEL

J U D G M E N T

NOVISI ARYENE JA:

By judgment delivered on 30th of July 2021, the Commercial Division of the High Court,

Accra dismissed Plaintiffs’ action against defendants for the following reliefs:

a. Declaration that defendants breached their fiduciary relations and duty towards

plaintiffs

b. Declaration that freezing of plaintiffs’ accounts by the defendant bank without a

court order was wrongful

c. General damages for breach of fiduciary relationship

d. General damages for wrongful freezing of accounts

Dissatisfied with the judgment, and alleging that the court proceedings of 30th July 2021

were in breach of the rules of natural justice because it was without notice to them,

plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as appellants) filed an application before the Supreme

Court on 29th of October 2021, praying for an order of certiorari to quash the

proceedings. On 7th of December 2021, the Supreme Court struck out the application as

withdrawn. On 30th of December 2021, appellants applied to the trial court for extension

of time to file an appeal against the decision of 30th July 2021. The application faced stiff

opposition from defendants (hereinafter referred to as respondents). By ruling delivered

on 4th of February 2022, the trial court refused the application, triggering the instant

appeal.

The ruling is being assailed under the following grounds of appeal:

I. The trial judge erred when he refused the leave for an extension of time to file an

appeal for reasons that the judgment to be appealed from was a well-considered

and reasoned judgment.

II. The trial judge erred when he refused to grant leave for an extension of time to file

an appeal because plaintiffs/appellants filed his written submission out of time

after several adjournments given to enable him file his written submission.

III. That the trial judge erred in refusing to grant leave for extension of time to file

appeal without justifiable cause.

Appellants are seeking two reliefs from this court: (i) An order to set aside the ruling

refusing leave to file appeal out of time; and (ii) an order to grant appellants leave to file

an appeal out of time against the judgment of the trial court dated 30th July, 2021.

Although appellant indicated in the Notice of Appeal that additional grounds will be

filed on receipt of the record, none was filed.

Two objections were raised by 2nd respondent to the instant appeal which we deem

expedient to address at this stage. At