REPUBLIC v. CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE, TAMALE; EX PARTE VOLTA, SENIOR GAME WARDEN

JUDGMENT OF ADADE J.S.C.

Adade J.S.C. delivered the ruling of the court. This is an application for enlargement of time within which to appeal against a judgment of the Court of Appeal dated 4 November 1985.

[p.375]

The applicant, B. K. Volta, the Senior Game Warden, Mole National Park, Damango, says that the appeal was heard without notice to him as required by rule 15 (2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 1962 (L.I. 218). By the time he got to know of the judgment, the statutory period within which he could properly appeal had lapsed, so he applied to the Court of Appeal for extension of time to enable him appeal. This statement cannot be correct as on his own showing he knew by 25 November 1985 that the appeal had been heard: see paragraph 15 of his affidavit. He says, however, that the application for extension, although filed within the proper time, was nonetheless refused on 12 May 1986. Accordingly, he has filed the instant fresh application to this court asking for an enlargement. The application purports to be made under rule 8 (6) of the Supreme Court Rules, 1970 (C.I. 13).

In argument, Miss Amassah, counsel for the applicant, referred also to the Court of Appeal Rules, 1962 (L.I. 218), r. 10 (6) as amended by the Court of Appeal (Amendment) Rules, 1969 (L.I. 618), and also to article 116 (1) of the Constitution, 1979. We do not hesitate to dismiss article 116 (1) of the Constitution as inapplicable to these proceedings and irrelevant.

Rule 8 (6) of C.I. 13 reads as follows:

"(6) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (4) of this rule where a person has applied to the Court below for an extension of time within which to lodge a civil appeal and a period of not less than one month has expired since the time when the said application was made without the Court below having granted or refused the application, the applicant shall be entitled to move the Court to have the application determined by the Court."

(The emphasis is ours.) And rule 10 (6) of L.I. 218 as amended by L.I. 618 is in the following terms:

"(6) For the purpose of sub-rule (4) of this rule and of the said rule 28, where a person has applied to the Court below for enlargement of time in which to appeal and a period of not less than one month has passed since the time when the said application was made without the Court below having granted or refused the application the Court below shall be deemed to have refused to grant the application and the applicant shall thereupon, subjec