THE REPUBLIC v. THE DISTRICT COURT EX PARTE MAAME EKUA KRAIKUE & ANOTHER
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- HONYENUGA, J.A. (PRESIDING)
- GYAN, J.A.
- SUURBAAREH, J.A.
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Probate and Succession
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Court of Appeal, per Honyenuga J.A., dismissed an appeal by the appellants—children of the late Francis Edoi Kraikue—challenging the High Court, Sekondi’s refusal to grant certiorari to quash a 1997 distribution of the intestate estate. The Community Tribunal (now District Court), Takoradi, had ordered its Registrar to distribute the estate by consent of counsel, and the Registrar prepared Exhibit “A,” a distribution report signed by the parties. However, Exhibit “A” was never filed or adopted as a court judgment. The High Court denied certiorari, and the Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that certiorari is a discretionary supervisory remedy limited to jurisdictional excesses, breaches of natural justice, or grave patent errors and that any alleged misapplication of section 4 of PNDCL 111 was a non-jurisdictional error for which the proper remedy was appeal. The Court further emphasized procedural compliance under Order 55 rule 7(1), and refused relief due to an 18-year delay and the parties’ acquiescence in the distribution.
HONYENUGA, J. A.
This is an appeal by the applicants/appellants against the Ruling of the High Court, Sekondi dated the 26th day of August, 2014 and 5th day of September, 2014 respectively which court refused an application for Judicial review under Order 55 rule 1 of C. I. 47 by the applicants/appellants (hereinafter called the appellants). The Interested party/respondent shall hereinafter be called the respondent.
The facts of this appeal were that the late Francis Edoi Kraikue died intestate sometime ago and left behind houses numbered House/No. 29/2, House No. 3/2A, and House No. 3/2B and other properties situated at Wassa Mpohor.
The appellants are part of the children of the deceased who together with the respondent who is the customary successor applied for and obtained letters of administration to administer the Estate of Francis Edoi Kraikue(Deceased). When the said administrators could not with accord distribute the estate of the deceased among the beneficiaries, the appellants representing their siblings took action against the respondent and one of the widows in the Community Tribunal now the District court, Takoradi.
After the appellants closed their case, both counsel for the parties before the then Community Tribunal consented that the Registrar of the court should distribute the estate of the deceased and the court made an order to that effect.
On the 23rd day of September, 1997, the Registrar distributed the estate and prepared a document evidencing the distribution with the Registrar and the parties having signed same.
However, the document evidencing the distribution was not filed and put before the said court for a consent judgment or decision to be entered for the parties.
The parties and the beneficiaries without any challenge or complaint peaceably enjoyed their share of the distributed estate from 1997 until 2013 when the appellants brought the instant application with leave of the court to quash the distribution made in 1997. Upon hearing the submissions of counsel for the parties, the learned trial judge refused the appellant’s application for judicial review to quash the distribution of the estate and dismissed same.
The learned trial judge first dismissed the said application on the 26th August 2014 without giving reasons but on the 5th September 2014, he delivered the full ruling with reasons.
Aggrieved by the ruling of the High Court, Sekondi, the appellants filed the instant appeal based on the following grounds: -(a