NANA NIFA ABANKRO & ORS v. NANA BOAKYE ANSAH
2016
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- P. BAFFOE- BONNIE
- S. A. B. AKUFFO (MS)
- V. AKOTO – BAMFO (MRS)
- YAW APPAU
- G. PWAMANG
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
2016
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves an appeal against the National House of Chiefs' refusal to extend time for the appellant, a chief, to file an appeal against his destoolment. The appellant claimed procedural issues due to the registrar's sickness, which were disproven by an affidavit. The Regional and National House of Chiefs rejected the appeal extension for missing the statutory time frame. The Supreme Court reviewed and upheld these decisions, emphasizing adherence to procedural rules, affirming the necessity of rebutting adverse affidavits, and clarifying that the definition of 'proper officer' includes any individual acting in the registrar's capacity.
JUDGMENT
BAFFOE-BONNIE JSC
This is an appeal against the decision of the Judicial Committee of the National House Of Chiefs (JCNHC) refusing to enlarge time within which to appeal against the decision of the Judicial Committee of the Adansi Traditional Council (JCATC) This appeal is pursuant to leave granted by this court on 3rd May 2013.
While preparing to write this decision we were served with a process titled AFFIDAVIT TO PULL OUT FROM THE CASE sworn to by Nana Nifa Abankro the first plaintiff /respondent in this case.. The 10 paragraph affidavit recounted the effect the suit has had on the development of the traditional area and concluded as follows;
8/ That, having thought about the bad effect the court case is having bad effect (sic) on the township I have decided to pull out from this case as the leader of the plaintiffs.
9/ That, I am therefore praying with the honourable Supreme Court Accra to strike my name from the case as the leader of the plaintiffs.
10/ That, I make this declaration to testify and certify that I am no more interested to pursue the case any further and that I have pull out from it absolutely for good.
This document signed by the first plaintiff personally was not accompanied by any motion and we do not know whether his counsel saw it and approves of it.
We do not know exactly the prayer that the deponent of the affidavit wants to convey. He recalls the negative effects that this suit is having on the traditional area and the need to discontinue with the action to heal wounds. If this is a sentiment shared by all the plaintiffs, then we think that the affidavit should be deposed to by all the plaintiffs or on their behalf, and they should be seeking to discontinue with the suit altogether. But the deponent assumes that being the first plaintiff he is the leader of the plaintiffs and therefore his prayer affects them. Unfortunately, even if he is the ring leader or leader of the malcontents, the law recognizes the other plaintiffs as plaintiffs in their individual rights. So, even if he is struck off the list the case will still go on.
But looking at the bigger picture we believe that the procedure adopted by the first plaintiff to have his name struck off is wrong. At this stage in the proceedings if a party wants to opt out it can only be done with the leave of the court. Leave of the court is sought through a motion paper supported by an affidavit. Merely filing an affidavit and saying that he has pulled out of the