REPUBLIC v. HIGH COURT, (PROBATE AND ADMINISRATION DIVISION), ACCRA
2019
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- ADINYIRA (MRS.), JSC (PRESIDING)
- DOTSE, JSC
- YEBOAH, JSC
- BAFFOE-BONNIE, JSC
- PWAMANG, JSC
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Alternative dispute resolution
2019
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The applicant sought orders of certiorari and prohibition against a High Court ruling that dismissed his preliminary legal objection regarding an arbitral award in a chieftaincy dispute. He claimed the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction, but the Supreme Court found his application misconceived, clarifying that the proper recourse was an appeal, not certiorari. The Supreme Court emphasized that certiorari is used to correct clear jurisdictional errors, not mere dissatisfaction with rulings. The application for certiorari was thus refused.
BAFFOE-BONNIE, JSC:-
The applicant has brought this application before us following the High Court’s ruling delivered by the High Court on a preliminary point of law raised by the said applicant. The application before us is for,
a. An Order of Certiorari to quash the ruling of the High Court, Probate & Administration Division, Accra, dated 10th May, 2018 in suit No. GJ1845/17 and,
b. An Order of prohibition against the High Court from entertaining, hearing or determining the suit No. GJ1845/17 commenced by originating motion on the 14th December, 2017;
Attached to the application was a 24-paragraph affidavit. The grounds for the application are as follows:
1. The High Court, Accra lacks jurisdiction to entertain or determine the Motion/Application filed by the 1-5th. Interested parties herein to set aside the arbitral award dated 29th March, 2012 on grounds of fraud, same having been brought out of time.
2. To the extent that the application to set aside the arbitral award was brought out of the statutory prescribed time lime as circumscribed by Act 798, the High Court acted in excess of its jurisdiction by assuming jurisdiction to entertain the application.
3. Suit No.GJ1845/17 was commenced pursuant to the wrong provision of law, that is, section 58 of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2010 (Act 798) rather than section 112 of the same Act.
For ease of appreciation of this ruling let us give a background of this application.
There was a long-standing dispute in Ada between two gates, the Da Gate and the Ablaokorm Gate as to which of the said two gates is entitled to nominate and install the Mankralo of Ada in the Greater Accra Region.
Over the years attempts at resolving the dispute by various committees proved futile. Finally, on the recommendation of the Ada Traditional Council, the parties submitted to a customary arbitration in respect of the dispute, paid requisite fees, participated fully and on the 29th of March, 2012, an arbitral award was delivered and same was registered at the High Court, Tema. The award was to the effect that, the Mankralo position should be ascended to by the Da gate and the Ablaokorm gate in rotation commencing with the Da gate. The Award indicated therefore that the Da Gate which had, the applicant herein, as its Mankralo candidate was to install the next Mankralo of Ada as opposed to the Ablaokorm Gate which had the 6th interested party as its Mankralo.
The 6th interested party herein, together with s