THE REPUBLIC vs. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, EX-PARTE YAKUBU AWABEGO [0223]DLCA17148

Date	2023-02-09
Suit No.	SUIT NO. H1/162/2020
Citation No.	[0223]DLCA17148

HENRY KWOFIE JA (PRESIDING)

ANTHONY OPPONG JA

RICHARD ADJEI-FRIMPONG JA

PHILIP MORGAN FOR APPLICANT/APPELLANT

EMMANUEL ADABAYERI FOR 3RD RESPONDENT

[0223]DLCA17148
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><div class="WordSection1">

<a name="_Hlk152849823">THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p></a>

vs.<o:p></o:p>

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL<o:p></o:p>

(RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>

(APPLICANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>

[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>

SUIT NO. H1/162/2020&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; DATE: 9TH&nbsp;FEBRUARY
2023<o:p></o:p>

</div>

COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>

PHILIP
MORGAN FOR APPLICANT/APPELLANT,<o:p></o:p>

&nbsp;EMMANUEL ADABAYERI FOR 3RD RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>

CORAM<o:p></o:p>

HENRY KWOFIE JA (PRESIDING), ANTHONY OPPONG JA, RICHARD ADJEI-FRIMPONG
JA<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;border:none;
mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>

&nbsp;

HENRY KWOFIE
JA:<o:p></o:p>

&nbsp;

This appeal was launched by the applicant/appellant against the ruling of the High
Court, Accra delivered on the 12th November, 2021.
The trial court in the ruling, dismissed the applicant/appellants Motion on notice
for Judicial Review in the nature of Mandamus under Order 55 of the High
Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2004 (C.I. 47). Dissatisfied with that ruling,
the applicant/appellant launched the instant appeal on the 4th of February 2022 on the following
grounds:<o:p></o:p>

a.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The judgment is against the weight of affidavit and documentary evidence
on record.<o:p></o:p>

b.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Her Ladyship fundamentally misdirected
herself which misdirection, resulted in her erroneously holding that matters in
contention can best be decided if the case should be decided on the merits when
the suit before her required a decision on the merits<o:p></o:p>

c.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Her Ladyship fundamentally erred in law in
wrongly exercising her discretion not to grant the order of mandamus by relying
on the irrelevant consideration that 1st and
3rd respondents disagreed with the
compensation assessed by the 2nd respondent
(Lands Commission) in respect of the appellant’s compulsorily acquired family
land.<o:p></o:p>