R U L I N G
DR. DATE-BAH JSC:
This case can easily be disposed of since the main issue in it has recently been authoritatively determined by a binding precedent of this Court. That binding precedent is the decision of this Court in Republic v High Court (Commercial Division); ex parte Attorney-General (Maud Nongo, Interested Party) (Suit No. J5/24/2012, unreported, delivered on 24th January 2013).
The facts of this present case are as follows: In April 2003, a High Court gave judgment in favour of the Interested Parties in this case. Under the judgment, the State was to prepare a comprehensive account on the use to which it had put the Interested Parties’ factory premises and the transactions carried out there. The State failed to do so. Accordingly, on 16th May 2012, Her Ladyship Ankumah J ruled that the Interested Parties recover $28,595,600 or its cedi equivalent against the State. This sum was monetary compensation to the Interested Parties for being denied the use and running of their factory for 32 years by the State. Following this judgment debt, the Applicant herein was served with a certificate pursuant to Section 15(1) of the State Proceedings Act, 1998 (Act 555) stating that the 1st and 2nd Defendants in the original suit (in short, the State or Republic) had been adjudged liable for $28,595,600. When the State failed to pay this judgment debt, the Interested Parties instituted garnishee proceedings against the State which resulted ultimately in a Garnishee Order Absolute made on 12th September, 2012 by his Lordship Ocran J. The order was in the following terms:
“It is hereby ordered that since the Bank of Ghana has no impediment in paying the cedi equivalent of the United States Dollars (US$28,595,600.00) at today’s selling rate of exchange from the Accounts of Ministry of Finance, the Bank of Ghana do pay the cedi equivalent of US$28,595,600.00 from the Ministry of Finance to the Plaintiffs/Judgment/Creditors.”
It is this order that the Applicant seeks to have this Court quash on the following grounds:
1. “The High Court erred when it granted an order directed at the Governor, Bank of Ghana to release funds from the Ministry of Finance Accounts (Account No. unspecified).
2. The High Court does not have jurisdiction to attach public funds in satisfaction of judgment debts.”
The case thus raises frontally the issue of the State’s liability to execution for its judgment debts, at least through the attachment of its funds. It is this sam