KHOURY AND ANOTHER v. MITCHUAL AND ANOTHER

Following an adverse High Court judgment on 15 May 1987, F. and M. Khoury’s appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 7 July 1988 (Khoury v. Mitchual [1989-90] 1 G.L.R. 161). Seeking to reach the Supreme Court, they filed a leave application in the Court of Appeal on 3 October 1988, but it breached the fourteen-day limit under rule 7(1) of the Supreme Court Rules and was dismissed on 8 May 1989 as incompetent. On 19 May 1989, represented by Joe Reindorf, they applied to the Supreme Court for leave or special leave; E. D. Kom for the respondents objected that a repeat application presupposes a competent first motion. In a lead ruling by Adade J.S.C., the Court held that section 3(2) of the Courts Act requires a valid application in the Court of Appeal and that an out-of-time motion is a nullity, leaving the Supreme Court without a basis to entertain a repeat. The Court acknowledged its special leave power under section 3(4) but found no exceptional justification, noting the applicants’ unexplained delays and failure to substantiate excuses. Concurring opinions by Taylor, Francois, Amua-Sekyi, and Osei-Hwere elaborated on the interplay of rules 7(1), 66(1), and sections 3(2) and 3(4). The application was dismissed with costs.