REPUBLIC vs. JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE WESTERN REGIONAL HOUSE OF CHIEFS; EX PARTE NANA KWABENA BUADEE AND ANOTHER [1974]DLHC2325

REPUBLIC vs. JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE WESTERN REGIONAL HOUSE OF CHIEFS; EX PA... [1974]DLHC2325

Date	1974-07-05
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1974]DLHC2325

CHARLES CRABBE J.

JAMES MERCER FOR THE APPLICANTS.

SEKYI HUGHES FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1974]DLHC2325
																																						<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:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">REPUBLIC <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:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">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:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE WESTERN REGIONAL<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:Times;mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;
mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:153">HOUSE OF CHIEFS; EX PARTE NANA KWABENA
BUADEE AND ANOTHER<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH COURT, SEKONDI]<o:p></o:p>&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;&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;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1974] 2 GLR 348<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:
5 JULY 1974.<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">

JAMES
MERCER FOR THE APPLICANTS.<o:p></o:p>

SEKYI
HUGHES 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">

CHARLES CRABBE J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF CHARLES CRABBE J.<o:p></o:p>Pursuant
to leave granted by the court, the applicants, Nana Kwabena Buadee and Nana
Kwamina Faibill III, asked for an order of prohibition directed to the judicial
committee of the Western Regional House of Chiefs to restrain that house from
hearing and determining an appeal purported to have been lodged by one Effua
Nsiaso of Mbease-Nsuta.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In an
affidavit of the 6 October 1973, sworn to by Nana Kwabena Buadee on behalf of
himself as the first applicant and Nana Kwamina Faibill III, the second
applicant, he had deposed that they were the respondents in an appeal before
the Western Regional House of Chiefs in an action in which the appellants were
Nana Kojo Armah and Nana Effua Nsiaso. That appeal was filed before the house
on 11 December 1971.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
notice of appeal which had started that appeal was signed by Nana Kojo Armah.
By a document dated 1 August 1972, Nana Kojo Armah discontinued that appeal.
When on or about 24 August 1973, the appeal was formally called before the
judicial committee of the Western Regional House of Chiefs, Nana Kojo Armah
“orally confirmed the discontinuance of the appeal.” Effua Nsiaso “however
dissociated herself from the discontinuance by Kojo Armah and the matter was
adjourned to 4 September 1973.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On the
adjourned date, 4 September 1973, counsel for the first and second applicants
herein “raised an objection to the continuance of the appeal in view of its
discontinuance by Kojo Armah and of the fact that Effua Nsiaso had not filed
any appeal . . .” This objection was overruled on 11 September 1973, and the
judicial committee “ordered the continued hearing of the appeal ...”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In its
ruling the judicial committee, inter alia, stated:<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">“This is
a case involving a stool, and Nana Nsiaso is interested as a kingmaker in the
outcome of whatever decision that will be given since [it] affects her
proprietary rights. It would therefore be unjust to deny her a right to be
heard just because she has been misled into believing that she still possesses
that right. The committee therefore finds itself, under the present
circumstances unable to follow the strict tenets of the decisions referred to
by respondent’s counsel, as doing so would be unjust and create undue denial of
her rights and contrary to natural justice. In the circumstances the committee
will overrule the objection and hold that Nana Nsiaso is still regarded as an
appellant and will hear her arguments on the merits.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>