GH - THOMAS OSEI v. E.P. GHANA

This ruling is in respect of an application by the plaintiff for extension of time to cross-appeal pursuant to rule 9 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 1997 (C.I. 19) as amended.

The facts culminating in the instant application are not in dispute. On 21st December, 2011 this court gave judgment in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant aggrieved by the said judgment filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal on 9th January, 2012. The plaintiff in the instant application seeks to cross-appeal for according to him he is also dissatisfied with certain portions of the said judgment.

It is my view that the instant application brought pursuant to rule 9 of C.I. 19 is incompetent. The proper rule of Court for cross-appeal is rule 15 of C.I. 19 which provides as follows:

“15. Notice for variation of judgment

(1) It is not necessary for the respondent to give notice by way of cross-appeal, but if a respondent intends on the hearing of the appeal to contend that the decision of the Court below should be varied, the respondent shall give, within one month after service of the notice of appeal, written notice in the Form 7 set out in Part one of the Schedule of that intention to every party who may be affected by the contention.

(2) The respondent shall clearly state in the written notice the grounds on which the respondent intends to rely and within the same period shall file with the Registrar of the Court below five copies of the notice, one of which shall be included in the record.

It is obvious from rule 15 of C.I. 19 that the plaintiff instant application is completely misconceived for he proceeds pursuant to rule 9 of C.I. 19. There is no provision in rule 15 of C.I. 19 for an extension of time to comply with Form 7. In any case the plaintiff did not attempt to comply with Form 7.

The plaintiff’s instant application therefore lacks merit and it is dismissed.

UUTER PAUL DERY

JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

This ruling is in respect of an application by the plaintiff for extension of time to cross-appeal pursuant to rule 9 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 1997 (C.I. 19) as amended.

It is my view that the instant application brought pursuant to rule 9 of C.I. 19 is incompetent. The proper rule of Court for cross-appeal is rule 15 of C.I. 19 which provides as follows:

“15. Notice for variation of judgment

The plaintiff’s instant application therefore lacks merit and it is dismissed.

UUTER PAUL DERY

JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

THOMAS OSEI v. E.P. GHANA

Areas of Law

RULING