CFAO vs. ZACCA

The applicants, CFAO, had sued S. Zacca in the High Court, Kumasi, for monies allegedly due under a hire-purchase agreement for a tractor. The tractor had been seized by CFAO for default in instalment payments. S. Zacca contended he was only a nominal party and that the real party was B. M. Zacca, who was joined as third party and admitted liability under the agreement but counterclaimed for damages for unlawful seizure of the tractor. The trial court dismissed CFAO’s claim and awarded damages to B. M. Zacca. On appeal, the former Court of Appeal dismissed CFAO’s appeal and increased the damages awarded to the respondent. After the 1969 Constitution came into force and created a new appellate structure, CFAO sought to extend time to appeal to the Supreme Court from the former Court of Appeal’s judgment of 15 August 1969, contending that constitutional transitional provisions preserved or converted its former right to seek review into a right of appeal. Portion relied on: opening narrative of the judgment beginning, “The present application raises points of great importance. The history of this matter may be shortly stated...” through the account of the High Court action, the Court of Appeal decision of 15 August 1969, and the later motion for extension of time.