REPUBLIC vs. ARMAH AND OTHERS; EX PARTE AMUGI II AND OTHERS

The applicants applied to the Court of Appeal for an order staying proceedings in the High Court pending the hearing and determination of an appeal against a ruling of the High Court delivered on 26 January 1993. The High Court had upheld an objection to Mr Joe Reindorf’s continued appearance for the applicants on the ground that he had previously acted for the wider family in relation to the same land and should not now appear for one faction against another faction of his former clients. The immediate controversy before the Court of Appeal was therefore whether proceedings in the High Court should be stayed pending appeal against that ruling. Portion of judgment: “This is an application by the applicants herein seeking an order: ‘staying all proceedings in the court below in this suit pending the hearing and final determination by this court of the appeal herein filed on 8 February 1993 from the ruling of the court below delivered on 26 January 1993.’” Also: “The objection was based on an allegation that counsel for the applicants in the court below, Mr Joe Reindorf, had acted for the whole family in an earlier case and that he should not be permitted by the court to appear for a faction of his former clients against the other faction in the instant case before the High Court concerning the same subject matter.”