THE REPUBLIC v. HIGH COURT, ACCRA EXPARTE: JUSTFAR HOLIDAY RESORT
2015
SUPREME COURT
CORAM
- ATUGUBA JSC (PRESIDING)
- AKUFFO (MS) JSC
- BAFFOE-BONNIE JSC
- GBADGEBE JSC
- AKOTO-BAMFO (MRS) JSC
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
2015
SUPREME COURT
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Supreme Court reviewed an application seeking to set aside a High Court ruling related to the release of auction sale funds. The applicant's argument centered around procedural errors in serving motions. The Supreme Court dismissed the application, stating that the misinterpretation of applicable legal principles and procedural missteps rendered the challenge void.
ATUGUBA JSC:
The applicant moves this court “for an order for certiorari to quash a ruling
of the High Court, 11 Accra delivered by His Lordship, Anthony Kwadwo
Yeboah on the 29th day of May 2014 in suit No. C266/2000 between
Janmen Co. Ltd and Justfar Holiday Resort Ltd. and to further restrain his
Lordship Anthony Kwadwo Yeboah from further hearing the said suit.”
Sometimes the parties refer to an application by the defendant to set aside
the Plaintiff’s motion for release of auction sale funds and at times to an
application to set aside the ruling allowing the motion for the release of the
said funds.
Whatever the nature of the application in issue it is clear that the present
application to this court relating to the Ruling of Anthony K. Yeboah dated
29/5/2014 is overtaken by the earlier Ruling of the said Judge dated
17/3/2014, exhibit JCL3 in which the learned Judge recounts the course of
applications on both sides relating to this matter.
Inter alia the learned Judge therein recounts that on the 23/10/2013 he set
aside Peter Odei Ofei J’s order dated 25/7/2013 but later reinstated the
same upon application by counsel for the Plaintiff/interested party herein.
Consequently, as stated by the learned trial Judge in exhibit JCL3:
“In the course of the execution proceedings some amount of money
became lodged with the Court. To have GH¢35,650.00 out of the
proceeds of the judicial sale released to the Plaintiffs, the company
filed the application for release of funds on 25/6/2013. This Court
differently presided over granted the application and made the order
dated 25/7/2013 to the effect that the amount of GH¢35,650.00
be released as prayed.
Subsequently, the Plaintiffs filed the application of 30/8/2013 for an
order extending the time within which to apply for a review of the
release order made on 25/7/2013.
However, before this application for extension of time could be
considered, the Defendant filed the application of 10/10/2013
seeking to have set aside ‘motion for order to release money” filed
by the Plaintiff/Judgment – Creditor/Respondent on 9th day of July
In fact, the thrust of the application to set aside was that the order
made for the release of fund was made without jurisdiction for the
reason that the application was not served on the
Defendant/Respondent but was rather served on a solicitor who
was then not instructed to act for the Defendant/Respondent.
It was evident from the affidavit in support an