[2024]DLSC17874 • November 11, 2024 • Supreme Court •
AHMED MUDDY ADAM vs. FRANK NUAMAH
The appellant (Ahmed Muddy Adam) was joined as the 3rd defendant in a land dispute suit (L205/2002) originally instituted by Frank Nuamah against Adjei Darko. Default judgment was entered against the defendants including the appellant, who did not defend the suit. The appellant later sought to set aside the default judgment on grounds of fraud, alleging non-service of hearing notices and misrepresentation of his identity and the land in dispute. The trial court dismissed the fraud claim, but the Court of Appeal reversed, setting aside the judgment. The Supreme Court now reviews the matter.
read moreJUDGMENT DARKO ASARE JSC; 1. My Lords, the question argued upon the hearing of this appeal is one of some considerable importance. It invites a reconsideration of the critical issue concerning the circumstances under which a judgment entered in default proceedings may be vacated on grounds of fraud. 2. This issue has lately become a matter of growing concern within the legal community, prompting expressions of concern from this Court regarding the proliferating practice of litigants leveraging unfounded allegations of fraud to undermine the finality of judgments rendered by courts of competent jurisdiction. See for instance, the views expressed by our illustrious Pwamang JSC in the recent case of John Bobie v 21 Century Constructions Ltd & 7 Ors, Civil Appeal No. J4/5/2014 (9th March 2016). 3. It reflects a tension between, on the one hand, the public policy consideration in favour of the finality of litigation and, on the other, the desire to do justice in individual case...