THE REPUBLIC VRS. THE HIGH COURT, TEMA EX PARTE: THE VESSEL MT ROSE, LEMLA OIL COMPANY LIMITED , THE OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL MT ROSE., KMO GOLDLINK INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED.

INTRODUCTION

1. In considering the present application, we found the dicta of our illustrious and venerable brother Adjei-Frimpong JSC to be apt and worth reproducing as follows;

“It is right to state here that generally, the rules of practice and procedure do not look favourably to ex parte applications. And why should they? Is the principle not universal that every person who may be affected by a decision of court must be given an opportunity to be heard? It is plain that the principle of audi alteram partem is the nerve center of the fair trial rules enshrined in the 1992 Constitution. It is for this reason that ex parte applications are granted only in exceptional cases and in cases of extreme urgency where it is near impossible to proceed in the normal way.”

REPUBLIC V. HIGH COURT, KOFORIDUA, EX PARTE; ERNEST YAWKUMI, HENRY BOAKYE YIADOM AND 2 OTHERS (AS INTERESTED PARTIES) [CIVIL MOTION NO: J5/37/2025] DATED 11TH JUNE 2025.

1. The above erudite statement of this Court which it spoke through our brother Adjei-Frimpong JSC is in tandem with an earlier decision of this Court in the oft quoted case of BARCLAYS BANK V GH CABLE CO LTD & ORS (1997-1998 2GLR 61 @ 67-68) wherein the Court, speaking through Acquah JSC uttered the following words of sage:

“It is not permissible and indeed it is a travesty of justice for a court to make an ex parte order in force pending the final judgement of the suit…”

1. The present application turns on a consideration of the nature and extent to which courts may entertain ex parte motions and the nature and extent of orders that may be permissible when courts consider ex parte motions without affording persons an opportunity to be heard.

2. The Applicant herein seeks an order for certiorari to quash the ruling of the High Court, dated 5th September, 2024 coram; Her Ladyship Justice Rita Agyeman-Budu

(Mrs.) delivered in Suit No. E2/115/2024. In the said ruling, the learned trial judge granted a motion ex parte and, among others, made consequential orders arresting and/or detaining the Applicant vessel within the jurisdiction pending the provision of a bank guarantee in the sum of One hundred and fifteen thousand dollars and ninety-five thousand Ghana cedis inclusive of interests and costs to be issued by a reputable Ghanaian bank and deposited with the Registrar of the Court.

BACKGROUND:

1. The Interested Party filed a Writ of summons and Statement o