PRACTICE NOTE: ARYEETEY vs. SMITH [1962]DLHC1676

Date	1962-02-19
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1962]DLHC1676

OLLENNU J.

[1962]DLHC1676
																																						<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">PRACTICE NOTE: ARYEETEY<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">&nbsp;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">SMITH <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1962] 1 GLR 114<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"> 19TH FEBRUARY, 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">

<o:p>&nbsp;</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 0in 0in">

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

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF
OLLENNU J.<o:p></o:p>The only rules which apply to the initiation of appeal proceedings
to the Supreme Court are the Supreme Court Rules, 1957, therefore it is to
those rules that we must look for authority, if any, to exercise jurisdiction
in this matter.<o:p></o:p>Now the powers of the Supreme Court and of the High Court to
enlarge time in matters connected with interlocutory proceedings for appeal
from the High Court to the Supreme Court are given expressly by rule 11 (1) and
implicitly by rule 11 (4). Rule 11 (1) says:<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">“Subject to any law for the time being in force no appeal shall be
brought after the expiration of fourteen days in the case of an appeal against
an interlocutory decision or of three months in the case of an appeal against a
final decision, unless the court below or the court shall enlarge the time.”<o:p></o:p>and rule 11 (4) says:<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">“No application for enlargement of time in which to appeal shall
be made after the expiration of one month from the expiration of the time
prescribed within which an appeal may be brought, etc.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Thus by rule 11 (1) the powers of the Supreme Court or of the High
Court to enlarge time are limited to the “time within which appeal may be
brought”; similarly rule 11 (4) also limits it to the “time prescribed within
which an appeal may be brought.” The question is what constitutes bringing an
appeal? Does application for special leave to appeal constitute bringing an
appeal? Rule 11 (3) defines what is meant by “bringing an appeal”. It says: “11
(3) An appeal shall be deemed to have been brought when the notice of appeal
has been filed in the Registry of the Court below”, i.e. the registry of the
High Court. Application for special leave to appeal therefore does not
constitute “bringing an appeal”.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>That takes us back to rule 10 (2) which shows that where an appeal
lies by special leave only, the right to bring an appeal does not accrue until
the date when special leave to appeal is granted, whilst in the case where an
appeal lies as of right, the right to bring the appeal accrues on the day of
the final judgment or order against which it is sought to appeal.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The true interpretation of rule 10 (2) therefore is: that in cases
where appeal lies by special leave only, appeal proceedings are initiated by
filing application for special leave to appeal, and that can be done only
within fourteen days of the date of the judgment or order; and that it is only
when that first step has been taken towards the acquisition of a right to
appeal that the court can become vested with jurisdiction to entertain an
application for enlargement of time. In this respect filing application for
special leave to appeal is on the same footing as filing notice in a local
court within one month of delivery of judgment of intention to appeal; if the
notice of intention to appeal is filed within the one month and default is made
in fulfilling the statutory conditions of appeal, the appellate court would be
vested with jurisdiction to enlarge the time for fulfilling the conditions of
appeal, but if a would-be appellant fails to file the notice of his intention
to appeal and the one month expires, the appellate court would have no jurisdiction
to grant him extension of time within which he could file the notice, since the
Local Court Procedure Regulations have no provision for enlarging time within
which the notice of intention to appeal may be filed: see Muffat v. Kpeshie II
(1952) 14 W.A.C.A. 44.<o:p></o:p>For these reasons I am in entire agreement with the ruling of
Smith, J., in Appardu v. Angu II [1960] G.L.R. 195.<o:p></o:p>

</main>