THE REPUBLIC v. WASSA FIASE TRADITIONAL COUNCIL & ORS
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- HONYENUGA, J.A. (PRESIDING)
- DENNIS ADJEI, J.A.
- ACKAH YENSU (MS), J.A.
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
- Civil Procedure
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves an appeal against a High Court decision dismissing an application for judicial review. The appeal was centered around the validity of an arbitration conducted by the 1st respondent and whether the application for certiorari was statute-barred. The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's decision, affirming that the application was void due to being filed out of the statutory time limit, and that the trial judge had the inherent jurisdiction to vacate the order granting leave for certiorari. The judgment emphasized the discretionary nature of certiorari and the importance of adhering to statutory time limits for judicial review applications.
HONYENUGA, J. A.
This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court, Tarkwa dated the 16th day of April 2012.
The said court dismissed an application for Judicial Review in the nature of certiorari to quash the decision of a panel set up by the first Respondent.
The Applicants/Appellants would be simply referred to as the Appellants and the Respondents/Respondents as the Respondents.
The facts of this appeal are that sometime in October 2005, the 2nd appellant was installed as the Chief of Dumasi Wassa within the Himan Division of the Wassa Fiase Traditional Area.
A rival group purported to have installed a rival chief, led to their arrest by the Police on charges relating to breach of the peace.
These persons were later arraigned before the Circuit Court, Tarkwa.
During the pendency of the matter in the said court, the 1st respondent applied to have the matter referred to it for an attempted settlement.
On the 8th day of December 2005, the 1st respondent met the culprits without due notice to the appellants and set up a purported arbitration panel.
The said purported arbitration panel purported to have made some decisions which affected the appellants.
Based on the said decisions, the appellants who were out of time filed for leave to apply for judicial review.
The trial High Court granted the application for leave to quash the said decision.
The grounds of the application for judicial review to wit: certiorari are: -1. That the said arbitration was palpably wrongful in law as it lacked the features of a valid customary arbitration.
2. That it is wrongful for the 1st respondent to alter the boundaries of a traditional area as set up by statute.
3. That the 1st respondent has no power whatsoever to direct that one Odikro/Subdivision should cease serving a particular division and transfer its traditional allegiance to some other division.
Upon hearing both Counsel for the parties, the learned trial judge dismissed the application for certiorari as being statute-barred and it was improper before the court.
The trial judge also based his decision on the fact that no decision was taken on the matter referred to the 1st respondent and therefore certiorari would not lie.
00 was awarded in favour of the 1st respondent and GH2, 000.
Being aggrieved by the decision of the trial High Court Judge, the appellants filed the instant appeal based on the original ground of appeal with additional grounds filed as follows: -(a) The judgment is agai