2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves a dispute over a 15 feet piece of land between two adjoining plot owners in Sunyani. The respondent sued for trespass and won on appeal after an initial dismissal. The applicants sought a stay of execution of the judgment, which was dismissed by a single justice. The full panel reviewed the decision, considering the appropriate prayer under the Constitution and whether the circumstances warranted a stay. The panel found that the applicants demonstrated greater hardship if execution proceeded and reversed the single justice's decision, staying execution until the Supreme Court's determination.
AYEBI, JA 1. In this Ruling, I shall refer to the defendants/respondents/appellants/applicants simply as applicants and plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent simply as respondent.
At the centre of controversy between the parties is a 15 feet piece of land between plot No. 27 owned by the 1st applicant and plot No. 28 owned by the respondent, all in the Central Area, Sunyani.
2. The respondent, alleging that the 1st applicant had trespassed on that portion, sued it for declaration for trespass to that 15 feet area, damages for trespass, amongst other reliefs.
The 2nd applicant joined the suit later.
3. On 11/05/13, the Sunyani High Court dismissed the respondent’s claim and entered judgment for the applicants.
An appeal to this court by the respondent was upheld on 27/02/16 with the following consequential orders: (a)Damages of GH¢50, 000. 00 for trespass against the applicants.
b)The Regional Surveyor and Surveyors appointed by the parties to determine the boundaries between plots 27 and 28 within 2 months from the date of judgment.
c) 1st applicant is ordered to pull down at its own expense, that part of the wall which was constructed on the respondent’s plot No. 28. 4. Being dissatisfied with the judgment, the applicants have appealed to the Supreme Court to set aside the judgment and consequential orders.
The applicants followed the notice of appeal filed with a motion for stay of execution of the judgment.
The motion was heard by a single justice of this court and dismissed on 12/04/16. Still not satisfied, the applicants on 07/06/16 filed this motion for stay of execution pending the appeal pursuant to Article 138(b) of the 1992 Constitution and section 12(B) of the Courts’ Act, 1993(Act 459). The said Article 138(b) states: “A single justice of the Court of Appeal may exercise a power vested in the Court of Appeal not involving the decision of a cause or matter before the Court of Appeal, except that –(a)…….
b) in civil matters, any order, direction or decision made or given in exercise of the powers conferred by this article, may be varied, discharged or reversed by the Court of Appeal as duly constituted”5. On 27th July 2016, when the motion came up for hearing by the full panel, we asked the parties to furnish us with written submissions because we were hard pressed for time.
The parties duly complied.
In the written submission on behalf of the respondent, counsel quoted the motion paper and submitted that the applicants only pra