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

MORKOR v. KUMA

1999

SUPREME COURT

GHANA

CORAM

  • EDWARD WIREDU
  • KPEGAH
  • ADJABENG
  • ACQUAH
  • AKUFFO JJSC

Areas of Law

  • Civil Procedure
  • Evidence Law

AI Generated Summary

Writing for the Supreme Court, Akuffo JSC addressed a motion in Civil Appeal No. 5/98 by the managing director of East Coast Fisheries Ltd to adduce fresh evidence alleging fraud in the High Court’s June 1991 summary judgment obtained by the respondent supplier of fish. The applicant argued the respondent’s counsel, Mr. Seth Matanawui, who also served as a director and company secretary of East Coast Fisheries Ltd and had at one time acted as her lawyer, misled her that the judgment would not be enforced, and she later suffered a debilitating stroke. The Court held the cited procedural rules (rules 5, 16, 23, and 53 of C.I. 16) were inapposite, and that rule 76 governed. Applying rule 76’s two hurdles—interest of justice and due diligence—the Court found the evidence was not “new” and could, with diligence, have been raised earlier. It therefore dismissed the application.