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

MICHAEL ANKOMAH-NIMFAH v JAMES GYAKYE QUAYSON & 2 ORS

April 13, 2022

CORAM

  • E.Y. KULENDI V.J.M. DOTSE M. OWUSU N G. TORKORNOO PROF. H.J.A.N MENSAH-BONSU N.A. AMEGATCHER A.M.A DORDZIE

Areas of Law

  • Constitutional Law
  • Civil Procedure
  • Equity and Trusts

AI Generated Summary

In the Supreme Court of Ghana, Michael Ankomah-Nimfah sought an interlocutory injunction to restrain James Gyakye Quayson from acting as Member of Parliament for Assin North pending determination of a constitutional suit interpreting Article 94(2)(a). The application followed a Cape Coast High Court judgment declaring Quayson’s election “null, void and of no legal effect whatsoever,” and a prior interim injunction. Quayson raised a preliminary objection that the motion was incompetent for invoking High Court procedural rules without prior leave under Rule 5 of C.I. 16. Writing for the majority, Kulendi JSC dismissed the objection, holding that rules regulate procedure, not jurisdiction, and that under Article 129(4) the Supreme Court may adopt High Court rules to do justice. Applying settled injunction principles, the majority found a prima facie constitutional question, a subsisting High Court judgment defining the status quo, and that the balance of convenience and public interest favored an injunction. The Court granted the interlocutory injunction and directed expedited case management. Dordzie JSC dissented, urging that enforcement of the High Court’s orders was the proper remedy and that interim restraint was unwarranted; Amegatcher JSC concurred in dissent, emphasizing lack of irreparable harm and the risk of prejudicing constituency representation.

RULING