REPUBLIC v. HIGH COURT, HO; EX PARTE EVANGELICAL PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, GHANA (E P CHURCH) AND OTHERS
1991
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- ADADE AG CJ
- FRANCOIS
- AMUA-SEKYI
- OSEI-HWERE
- AIKINS JJSC
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
1991
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Evangelical Presbyterian Church and its Moderator sought to quash a High Court ruling that restrained them from ex-communicating plaintiffs and other actions. The respondents opposed and raised a preliminary objection based on procedural rules. The court clarified the inapplicability of rule 13(1) of the Supreme Court Rules to original applications for certiorari and overruled the preliminary objection. The court provided new procedural guidelines for future applications and directed the respondents to file an answer within seven days.
JUDGMENT OF ADADE AG. CJ.
Adade Ag CJ delivered the judgment of the court. On 4 November 1990 the applicants, Evangelical Presbyterian Church and the Right Reverend Professor N K Dzobo (Moderator), filed an application asking this court, in the exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction, to bring up and quash the ruling of the High Court, Ho, dated 18 October 1990, in trans suit No 1/89, by which the said High Court restrained the applicants (ie, the defendants in this suit) temporarily and pending the hearing and final determination of the said transferred suit, from:
“(i) Ex-communicating the plaintiffs herein from the first defendant church.
(ii) Banning the bible study and prayer fellowship of the various branches of the first defendant church of which the plaintiffs are members from operating.
(iii) Transferring, suspending or dismissing pastors of the fist defendant church, especially those who have thrown their weight behind the plaintiffs herein."
The motion was accompanied by, as usual, an affidavit in support of the application and a statement setting out, inter alia, the grounds upon which the relief is being sought. The affidavit had attached to it a number of exhibits. The motion, together with all the [p.40] attachments, was served on the plaintiff-respondents (hereinafter referred to as the respondents) on 14 and 16 November 1990.
On 9 January 1991 the respondents filed an affidavit in opposition to the application. Then on 11 January 1991 they filed a notice of a preliminary objection, to the effect that the application is incompetent and cannot be entertained by the court. The notice of objection was placed under rule 7(1) of the Supreme Court Rules, 1970 (CI 13). No indication had been given in the affidavit of 9 January 1991 that such a preliminary objection was contemplated.
The substance of the objection is that having filed the motion on 14 November 1990 the applicants were under obligation to file a statement of their case within 21 days, or else their application must be deemed to have been struck out on the expiry of the said 21 days. They support this position by reference to Republic v Court of Appeal; Ex parte Adu Gyamfi Supreme Court, 21 July 1981, unreported and Republic v Court of Appeal; Ex parte Aduhene, Supreme Court, 21 July 1981, unreported. They also refer to Republic v Darkwa [1982-83] GLR 129, SC and Pomaa v Fosuhene, Supreme Court, 17 June 1987; digested in [1987-88] GLRD 27. The last two cases are not par