LINUS VICTORY KAY-FIANYO & ANOTHER v. EMMANUEL KWEKU KETEKU
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- VICTOR OFOE JA
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Constitutional Law
- Judiciary Law
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case centers on the plaintiffs request for an extension of time to file their appeal after the Hohoe Circuit Court delayed providing the judgment necessary for the appeal. The majority of the court refused this request, noting they were significantly beyond the six-month window stipulated by court rules. Justice Ofoe dissented, arguing that it was unjust to penalize the plaintiffs due to inherent delays and administrative failures of the court system itself. He invoked the principle of substantial justice, suggesting that mechanical application of rules should not thwart fairness. Supporting his stance, he cited several cases where procedural errors by court officials did not invalidate the rights of the parties affected by such omissions. Conclusively, Ofoe advocated for their application to be granted, emphasizing that justice should prevail over procedural rigidity.
RULING
OFOE,J.A:
The plaintiffs/applicants application for extension of time came before us on the 20th of March 2013 as a repeat application from the Hohoe Circuit Court. .The Circuit Court had refused their application for extension of time to file their appeal with the main reason that they were out of time by the rules of court. After listening to both counsel and reading the processes filed before us the repeat application for extension of time was by a majority of this court refused. Unfortunately I could not agree with my able sisters that the application be dismissed. The reasoning of my colleagues was that, to put it tersely, the plaintiff/applicants were unpardonably out of the 6 months period stipulated by the Court of Appeal rules within which one is to lodge an appeal. The plaintiffs had to be sent packing out of court. I hereby state my reasons for departing from my colleagues. I will refer to the applicants as plaintiffs and the respondent as defendant as they were in the trial court.
The facts of the case are simple and not disputed. It is a case in which the trial circuit judge made an announcement on the 22nd August 2008 dismissing the case of the plaintiffs’ and reserving the reasons for his judgment to a subsequent unspecified date. The reasoned judgment was given on the 15th February 2012 by the trial judge.ie about three and half years later. He has been transferred and had to come back to give this reasoned judgment, as stated, in three and half years later. After the announcement of this judgment on the 22nd August 2008 dismissing the case of the plaintiffs, they applied for a copy of the judgment on the 12 /9/2008, 12th April 2009 and 12 /4/2010 but had no response from the court to these requests. So not only could the court not provide the plaintiffs with the judgment but it also took the trial court about three and a half years to produce the reasoned judgment. One of the interesting questions that the circumstances of this case raise, on a closer examination of the records before us, is whether there was any judgment recorded on this 22nd August 2008 at all. I ask this question because on the 29th February 2012, last year, when counsel, who the plaintiffs had subsequently engaged, wrote to the court asking for this judgment of the 22nd August 2008, the registrar of the court answered as follows
“……………there is no trace of the judgment delivered by His Honour the judge prior to the giving of his reasons”
So what happened in