THE REPUBLIC vs. FAST TRACK HIGH COURT, ACCRA EX PARTE; SIAN GOLDFIELDS LIMITED (APPLICANT) AND AUREX MANAGEMENT AND INVESTMENT (INTERESTED PARTY)

The Interested Party sued the Applicant for recovery of money, represented by a lawful attorney under a Power of Attorney. The Applicant challenged the capacity of the Interested Party's attorney on grounds of irregularity of the Power of Attorney. The High Court dismissed the challenge, but the Court of Appeal set aside the writ for lack of authorization. The Interested Party withdrew its appeal to the Supreme Court and issued a fresh writ with a different Power of Attorney. The Applicant again challenged the capacity of the attorney in the fresh suit, which was dismissed by the High Court. The Applicant then sought supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to quash the High Court judgment.

ANIN YEBOAH, JSC:- The applicant herein was sued by the interested party for recovery of a sum of money due and owing to the interested party. The usual ancillary relief of interest was also endorsed on the writ. The facts leading to the claim is not necessary for the determination of this application. It appears, however, that the interested party was represented by its lawful attorney, one Mr. Kwaku Twumasi Ampofo. The High Court, at the application for directions set down the issue of capacity of the interested party to be argued by the parties, as the applicant had challenged the capacity of the plaintiffs on the grounds that the Power of Attorney was irregular. On 6/12/2005, the High Court dismissed the application to set aside the writ on grounds of want of capacity. The applicants herein appealed to the Court of Appeal which by a majority decision on 12/07/2007 allowed the appeal and set aside the writ of summons and made further consequential orders as follows: “the w.....