Eskwai logo
Verify now as a student, judge or newly called lawyer for access to discounted plans.

KAKRABA AND ANOTHER v. KANFA I

1990

COURT OF APPEAL

GHANA

CORAM

  • AMPIAH
  • ESSIEM
  • OFORI-BOATENG JJ.A

Areas of Law

  • Civil Procedure
  • Constitutional Law

AI Generated Summary

This case concerns the interpretation of section 2(3)(b) of the Courts (Amendment) Law, 1987 (P.N.D.C.L. 191) and its effect on the right to appeal under section 10(3) of the Courts Act, 1971 (Act 372). The appellants, having lost their case twice successively in lower courts, filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal without obtaining leave. The respondent raised a preliminary objection, arguing that P.N.D.C.L. 191 requires leave for such an appeal. The appellants contended that P.N.D.C.L. 191 could not amend the unfettered right of appeal provided in Act 372. The court, relying on the principle that P.N.D.C. Laws take precedence over conflicting laws, held that P.N.D.C.L. 191 effectively amended Act 372, requiring leave for appeal after two successive losses. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in limine for not being properly before the court. This judgment affirms the requirement of obtaining leave for appeals to the Court of Appeal after losing twice in lower courts, as per P.N.D.C.L. 191.

JUDGMENT