[2013]DLSC2734 • January 22, 2013 • Supreme Court •
NANA OTUO ANTWI BOASIAKO vs. NANA ADJEI PANIN II
The applicant sought leave to adduce fresh evidence in the form of a map allegedly related to the boundary dispute between the parties, claiming it was discovered during the pendency of the appeal and was used in a 1927 case determining the boundary. The respondent denied the relevance and use of the map in the 1927 proceedings.
read moreBY COURT; This is a motion on notice for leave to adduce fresh evidence at the hearing of this appeal, pursuant to Rule 76 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1996 CI 16. From this rule, it is clear that the primary rule is that new evidence may not be adduced in an appeal, before this court. However, there is an exception which allows this Court to permit the adducing of new evidence relevant to the issue before this court in the interest of justice. However, before this Court can allow such new evidence it must be satisfied that with due diligence or enquiry, the evidence could not have been and was not available to the party applying for leave to adduce new evidence. Accordingly, before I can grant the applicant the leave that he seeks, he has to satisfy me on several counts: First, that the new evidence he seeks to adduce is relevant to the issue or issues before this court. Secondly, that due diligence or enquiry could not have made available to the applicant the evidence concern...