[2022]DLSC11738 • April 5, 2022 • Supreme Court •
MICHAEL ANKOMAH-NIMFAH vs. JAMES GYAKYE QUAYSON, THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION AND THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL
The case involves a dispute concerning the validity and procedural compliance of substituted service of court processes in an election-related civil matter. The applicant challenged the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to fix hearing dates and proceed with the case on grounds of alleged noncompliance with procedural rules regarding service and timelines for filing defenses and memoranda. The applicant contended that service was only valid after publication on 1st March 2022, thus the court lacked jurisdiction to fix hearing dates before expiration of prescribed timeframes.
read moreTORKORNOO (MRS.) JSC:- The 1st defendant in this action is the applicant herein. He is seeking a review of orders made by this court on 8th March 2022.The present application invokes the jurisdiction of the court created by Article 133 (1) of the 1992 Constitution and Rule 54 of the Supreme Court Rules 1996, CI 16. Article 133 provides in Article 133 (1) The Supreme Court may review any decision made or given by it on such grounds and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed by rules of court. To this end, Rule 54 of the Supreme Court Rules 1996, CI 16 sets the following condition inter alia: 54. The court may review any decision made or given by it on any of the following grounds – a. exceptional circumstances which have resulted in miscarriage of justice; Background Facts The plaintiff and 1st respondent to this application filed a Writ numbered J7/11/2020 invoking the original jurisdiction of this court on 24th January 2022.He sought the following reliefs against .....