MOSES ADJEI AFFUM & ANOR v. ABUSUAPANYIN KOFI OWUSU
2018
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- SAEED KWAKU GYAN
- K. A. ACQUAYE
- MABEL AGYEMANG (MRS)
Areas of Law
- Appeal Process
- Court Procedures
- Burden of Proof
- Discretionary Remedies
- Judicial Decisions
2018
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Defendants appealed against the rulings of Justice Barbara Ward Acquah dated 25th January 2016 and 15th July 2016. The appeal raised several legal issues including errors in law and facts, and the competence of the Plaintiffs application. The Court found no merit in the Defendants' appeal and upheld the trial Court's decision dated 15th July 2016.
JUDGMENT
SAEED K. GYAN, JA:
By his Written Submission filed on 15/01/2018 Learned Counsel for the “Defendants/Appellants” had presented this Court with a clearly incongruous “appeal”.
On the very first page of Learned Counsel’s aforesaid Written submission he delivers himself thus:
“The Defendants appeal will encompass the two rulings Her Ladyship Justice Barbara Ward Acquah (Mrs) J, delivered on
1. 25th January 2016 (captured on pages 150-151 on Records of Proceedings volume one) and
2. 15th July 2016 (captured on page 181-183 on Records of Proceedings volume Two).
The Defendants aggrieved by these two rulings have filed this appeal. The grounds of Appeal are found on pages 184-185 on Record of Proceedings. There are seven grounds of Appeal” (Emphasis provided)
Learned counsel then proceeded to “consider” his grounds of appeal “in the reverse order starting with ground f” to the effect that “the Judgment of 21st April 2015 is unassailably sound and the Ruling of 25th January 2016 is void”.
The Notice of Appeal relevant to this case can be found on page 184 of the Record of Appeal. (Volume Two). It was filed on 20th July 2016.
That Notice of Appeal was clearly stated to be against “the ruling of Her Ladyship Mrs Barbara Ward Acquah Justice sitting at the High Court, Koforidua on the 15th day of July 2016…” which appears on page 181 of the said record of appeal.
The reliefs sought in the appeal were two fold, namely;
“a) The whole ruling be set aside
b) Defendants’ application be granted”.
The grounds of appeal contained in the Notice of Appeal filed on 20/7/2016 are set out in full as follows:
a) The ruling of Her Ladyship is not supported by the law.
b) The ruling of Her Ladyship is not supported by the evidence
c) i) The learned Judge erred on the facts when she held that the defendants intended to move their motion on ground of fraud and not on grounds of mistake and suppression of material facts as they claimed.
ii) The learned Judge erred in law when she held that because Defendants had intended to move the motion on the grounds of fraud they could not in law move the motion at all and therefore the order setting aside the judgment remained
d) The learned Judge erred in law when she held that failure of Plaintiff’s Lawyer to serve his client, the Plaintiff, with the notice of his withdrawal rendered the subsequent proceedings void.
e) The learned Judge erred on the facts and in law when she held that Plaintiff did not know the De