THE REPUBLIC v. FAST TRACK HIGH COURT, EX PARTE: SIAN GOLDFIELDS LIMITED
January 29, 2009
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- BROBBEY, JSC, (PRESIDING)
- ANSAH, JSC
- ADINYIRA (MRS), JSC
- DOTSE, JSC
- ANIN YEBOAH, JSC
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Constitutional Law
January 29, 2009
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Supreme Court ruling arises from an application for certiorari to quash a Fast Track High Court judgment in litigation between the applicant and Aurex Management and Investment AS/SA, which sued through its attorney, Kwaku Twumasi Ampofo, to recover monies allegedly owed. After an initial capacity challenge failed in the High Court, the Court of Appeal by majority set aside the earlier writ and proceedings as null for lack of authorization; a further Supreme Court appeal was withdrawn, and Aurex filed a fresh suit (AC 158/2007) under a different power of attorney dated 9 August 2005. The High Court dismissed renewed capacity objections, directed filings, and entered judgment for Aurex. The applicant’s four grounds for certiorari—alleged breach of audi alteram partem, excess of jurisdiction in disregarding the Court of Appeal decision, lack of jurisdiction due to the prior nullity, and suspension of jurisdiction owing to a stay motion—were rejected. The Supreme Court held adjournments are discretionary, the fresh power of attorney distinguished the case, the prior nullity did not preclude a new action, and a pending stay did not oust jurisdiction. The application was dismissed for want of merit.
RULING
ANIN YEBOAH, JSC:-
The applicant herein was sued by the interested party for recovery of a sum of money due and owing to the interested party. The usual ancillary relief of interest was also endorsed on the writ. The facts leading to the claim is not necessary for the determination of this application. It appears, however, that the interested party was represented by its lawful attorney, one Mr. Kwaku Twumasi Ampofo. The High Court, at the application for directions set down the issue of capacity of the interested party to be argued by the parties, as the applicant had challenged the capacity of the plaintiffs on the grounds that the Power of Attorney was irregular.
On 6/12/2005, the High Court dismissed the application to set aside the writ on grounds of want of capacity. The applicants herein appealed to the Court of Appeal which by a majority decision on 12/07/2007 allowed the appeal and set aside the writ of summons and made further consequential orders as follows:
“the writ filed by Kwaku Twumasi Ampofo and all process following in this case are null and void for lack of authorization by Annex Management Company”
The interested party here lodged an appeal against the majority decision to this court but subsequently on 4/12/2007 withdrew the appeal. It follows that the majority decision stood as the subsisting judgment of the court.
As the writ had been declared a nullity, the interested party issued a fresh writ as suit № AC 158/2007 and indorsed it as follows: AUREX MANAGEMENT AND INVESTMENT AS/SA, Acting by its lawful Attorney Kwaku Twumasi Ampofo etc before the Fast Track High Court, Accra.
Both parties settled pleadings and it appeared that the applicant as defendant in the suit repeated his objection on the capacity of the interested party’s lawful attorney.
According to the applicant, the same power of attorney which had been rejected by the Court of Appeal in the earlier suit at the court of Appeal was being used at the High Court in the fresh suit. The High Court judge on 1/4/2008 dismissed the application whereupon the applicants herein lodged an appeal to the Court of Appeal and filed a motion to stay proceedings of the High Court. The learned High Court judge dismissed the application which was subsequently repeated at the Court of Appeal.
The learned trial judge at the application for directions stage ordered the parties herein to file their respective documents in the case as according to him, the suit could be disposed of