ASARE vs. OPPONG [1967]DLCA1452

Date	1967-06-15
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1967]DLCA1452

AZU CRABBE JA

APALOO JA

LASSEY J.A.

J. K. AGYEMANG FOR THE APPELLANT.

F. E. CREPPY FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1967]DLCA1452
																																						<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" >ASARE <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>OPPONG <o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL]<o:p></o:p>[1967] GLR 433<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:
15 JUNE 1967.<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">

J. K. AGYEMANG FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

F. E. CREPPY FOR THE RESPONDENT.<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">

AZU CRABBE, APALOO AND LASSEY JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF AZU CRABBE J.A.<o:p></o:p>Azu
Crabbe J.A. delivered the judgment of the court. When hearing of the appeal in
this case was about to commence last Tuesday, 13 June 1967, counsel for the
appellant asked leave of the court to make certain preliminary observations. He
stated that the appeal in this case was fully argued in the High Court, Ho,
before Kingsley Nyinah J., but before the learned judge could deliver his
reserved judgment the case was transferred to this court on the directions of
the Chief Justice. This transfer was no doubt made by virtue of paragraph 38 of
the Courts Decree, 1966 (N.L.C.D. 84), which vests the Chief Justice with power
to transfer “any cause or matter from a judge of a Court . . . to any other
Judge of such Court and from a Court . . . to any other competent Court . . .”
Arguments before Kingsley-Nyinah J. took place after the Courts Decree, 1966
(N.L.C.D. 84), had come into operation, and when decisions of the circuit court
had become appealable to the Court of Appeal by virtue of paragraph 36 of the
Decree. Paragraph 36 reads 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">“Without
prejudice to any powers or rights otherwise expressly provided for in the
provisions of this Decree or in any other enactment for the time being in
force, any person aggrieved by a decision of a Circuit Court, other than a
decision in a summary trial of a criminal case may, subject to and in
accordance with those provisions, appeal to the Court of Appeal.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
proceedings in this case were brought under the Workmen’s Compensation Act,
1963 (Act 174), and by section 21 of that Act appeals from the decision of the
circuit court lie to the High Court. The provisions of section 21 has not been
repealed, and we think, therefore, that notwithstanding paragraph 36 of
N.L.C.D. 84 any appeal from the decision of the circuit court in an action
initiated under the provisions of section 21 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act,
1963, is still “subject to and in accordance with [the] provisions” of section
21 of that Act.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In our
opinion the Chief Justice’s directive that all appeals pending before the
circuit court were to be transferred to the Court of Appeal was not intended to
apply to appeals form decisions of a circuit court judge in proceedings under
the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1963. We hold therefore that we have no
jurisdiction to entertain the appeal in this matter, and we order that the case
be remitted to the High Court, Ho, for Kingsley-Nyinah J. to give his reserved
judgment, or if that is impossible, to re-hear the appeal. No order as to cost.
Court below to carry out.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></main>