KWAO vs. NORTEY [1962]DLHC1484

Date	1962-04-11
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1962]DLHC1484

OLLENNU J.

E. N. P. SOWAH FOR D. Y. OSEI FOR THE DEFENDANT-APPLICANT.

PLAINTIFF IN PERSON.

[1962]DLHC1484
																																						<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" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">KWAO <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">vs. <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">NORTEY <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1962] 1 GLR 271<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

DATE:<span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0"> 11TH APRIL, 1962.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

E. N. P. SOWAH FOR D. Y. OSEI FOR THE DEFENDANT-APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>

PLAINTIFF
IN PERSON.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 6.0pt 0in">

OLLENNU J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF
OLLENNU J.<o:p></o:p>The defendant-applicant seeks an order of prohibition against the
Accra East Local Court and the respondent from proceeding with a suit now
pending before the said Accra East Local Court in which the respondent is
plaintiff and the applicant is defendant. He contends that the local court has
no jurisdiction in the suit, a land cause. Before making his application to
this court, the defendant had moved the local court to dismiss the said suit
for want of jurisdiction, but the local court had dismissed the application,
ruling as follows:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“The defendant-mover could not prove as to how he arrived at the
figure of £G250 as being the value of the land in dispute which he stated he
acquired as a gift of £G15. Several other lands of identical dimensions in the
area had been adjudicated upon by this local court and this is the first case
in which a litigant had raised the question of jurisdiction relative to value.
I am satisfied that the value of £G250 placed on the land by the mover is not
proved.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>This ruling of the local court magistrate begs the question and is
a misdirection.<o:p></o:p>The local court is an inferior court, the presumption of law
therefore is that it has no jurisdiction in any suits unless it is shown
positively that jurisdiction in the particular cause or matter is vested in it
by statute. It is otherwise in the case of a superior court; there the
presumption of law is that a superior court has jurisdiction over any cause or
matter except one expressly shown to have been excluded from its jurisdiction
by statute.<o:p></o:p>The jurisdiction of the local court in land causes is conferred by
section 98 of the Courts Act, 1960.1(1) That jurisdiction is strictly limited
by section 98 (2) of the Act to: (1) a land cause in which the value of the
land does not exceed £G200, and (2) a land cause in which though the value of
the land exceeds £G200, the parties expressly consent that the local court
should try it. In this case the defendant expressly refused to give his consent
to the local court exercising jurisdiction in the cause. Therefore the only
circumstance in which the local court could have jurisdiction to entertain the
cause is clear proof that the value of the land in dispute is not above £G200.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Since it is a plaintiff who selects his court, a plaintiff who
institutes an action in an inferior court takes upon himself, first and
foremost, the onus of proving to the inferior court that his claim is within
the jurisdiction given to the inferior court by statute. This is particularly
so where the jurisdiction of the inferior court is disputed by the defendant.
If the plaintiff fails to produce such proof, the inferior court should decline
to exercise jurisdiction in the cause or matter.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The defendant, as shown above, challenged the jurisdiction of the
local court, but the plaintiff made no effort to prove that the value of the
land is not above £G200. All he had done in this court is to rely upon the
ruling made by the local court. The defendant on the other hand produced
concrete facts which, at the very least, raised a strong presumption that the
plaintiff failed to prove that the local court possessed jurisdiction.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The presump</main>