LOGA vs. DAVORDZI AND OTHERS [1966]DLSC1715

Date	1966-06-13
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1966]DLSC1715

SARKODEE-ADOO C.J

AZU CRABBE JSC

OLLENNU J.S.C.

E. V. DE GRAFT-JOHNSON FOR THE APPLICANT.

C. E. QUIST FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1966]DLSC1715
																																						<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" >LOGA<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;vs. <o:p></o:p>DAVORDZI AND OTHERS <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT]<o:p></o:p>[1966] GLR 530<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DATE:
13 JUNE 1966.<o:p></o:p>

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

E. V. DE GRAFT-JOHNSON FOR THE APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>

C. E. QUIST FOR THE RESPONDENTS.<o:p></o:p>

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

SARKODEE-ADOO C.J., AZU CRABBE AND
OLLENNU JJ.S.C.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF SARKODEE-ADDO C.J.<o:p></o:p>The
applicant by his counsel seeks by this motion made under rule 10 (1) of the
Supreme Court Rules, 1962,1 enlargement of time to file an appeal to this court
against a final judgment of Sowah J. delivered on 25 June 1965. The motion was
filed at the registry of the court on 3 December 1965, that is, five months and
eight days after the said judgment. The facts alleged by the applicant in his
supporting affidavit and the allegations by the respondents in answer and in
opposition to the application are controversial and, in the main, irrelevant
for the purposes of this ruling, save and except that the respondents’
representative, by his affidavit, alleged thus:<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">“(7) That
I am informed by counsel and verily believe that this application is not
properly before the Supreme Court. (8) That I am further informed by counsel
and verily believe that the application is altogether misconceived and
frivolous. And in the circumstances the respondents pray for the dismissal of
the application.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>What is
sought from the court is a true and proper construction of the said rule 10
which provides as follows: “10. <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">(1)
Subject to any enactment 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><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">(2) The
prescribed period for appeal shall be calculated from the date of the decision
appealed against:<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"><o:p>&nbsp;</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">Provided
that where there is no appeal as of right the prescribed period shall be
calculated from the date upon which special leave to appeal is granted. <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">(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. <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">(4) 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. Every such application shall be supported by an
affidavit setting forth good and substantial reasons for the application and by
grounds of appeal which prima facie show good cause for leave to be granted.
Any such application shall be made to the Court below whose decision shall be
final; and when time is so enlarged a copy of the order granting such
enlargement shall be annexed to the notice of appeal.”<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">Rule 10
(1) and (4) are the pertinent provisions for consideration as to whether or not
the application is competent or properly before the court. Learned counsel for
the respondents argued that upon due consideration of this rule, it appears the
proper interpretation is that within the first three months after a final
judgment, and within the first fourteen days after an interlocutory judgment,
as the case may be, a would-be appellant, anticipating that the appeal could
not be filed within the statutory period, may apply to the court below or this
court for enlargement of time by motion within the prescribed statutory period
for enlargement of time under, and by virtue of rule 10 (1). Failing that, the
application, in either case, should be made within one month after the
expiration of the prescribed statutory period to the court below. But no
application lies to either court after four months from the date of the
judgment.<o:p></o:p>