REPUBLIC vs. CAPE COAST DISTRICT MAGISTRATE GRADE II; EX PARTE AMOO [1975]DLHC427

Date	1975-11-10
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1975]DLHC427

EDWARD WIREDU J.

DE GRAFT AIDOO FOR THE APPLICANT.

G. B. ADINYIRA ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE RESPONDENT.

E. S. AIDOO FOR UNIVERSITY OF CAPE COAST.

[1975]DLHC427
																																						<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" >REPUBLIC <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>CAPE COAST DISTRICT MAGISTRATE GRADE II; EX PARTE AMOO<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH
COURT, CAPE COAST]<o:p></o:p>[1976] 1 GLR 116<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

DATE:
10 NOVEMBER 1975.<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">

DE GRAFT AIDOO FOR THE APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>

G. B. ADINYIRA, ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY, FOR THE
RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

E. S. AIDOO FOR UNIVERSITY OF CAPE COAST.<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">

EDWARD WIREDU J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF EDWARD WIREDU J.<o:p></o:p>This
application involves a consideration of the extent and scope of the powers of
the Chief Justice in the appointment of judicial officers with particular
reference to the appointment of district magistrates.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
events of this case which seem to have given rise to the above matters for
consideration may be briefly stated as follows: On or about 27 February 1975
the applicant herein caused to issue against the University of Cape Coast, a
writ of summons bearing the suit No. 21/75 in the Cape Coast District Court
Grade I for an amount of ¢650.00 “being my acting or responsibility allowance
or both.” Whilst the case was pending, Mr. Abaka, the substantive grade I
magistrate attached to the said court had to proceed on leave. In his absence a
Mr. Haizel the district magistrate grade II of Cape Coast assumed duty in the
grade I court as an acting grade I magistrate, having been thus appointed on
the facts of this case by the Chief Justice. In that capacity, he proceeded to
hear the applicant’s case and determined the same in a judgment of 29 May 1975.
I must mention here that before judgment was delivered in the case, a belated
application was made by the applicant to have the case transferred, but this
was later withdrawn. It is the said proceedings and judgment delivered in this
case by the district magistrate grade II acting as a grade I magistrate which
the applicant is seeking an order of certiorari to quash.<o:p></o:p>In his
supporting affidavit, the applicant complained 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">“(2) That
until I retired, I was employed by the University of Cape Coast. <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) That
on 27 February 1975 I caused to issue against the defendant my writ of summons
(suit No. 21/75) in the District Court Grade I, Cape Coast, for ¢650.00 being
my acting or responsibility allowance or both and a copy of my application for
the writ to issue together with its supporting affidavit are hereto attached
marked A. <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) That
when the suit came on for hearing on 18 March 1975 the substantive grade I
district court magistrate was away on leave and Mr. Haizel, the grade II
district court magistrate, purported to act as the district court grade I
magistrate and insisted on hearing the suit (contrary to the advice of my solicitor)
because, as he put it, he has been so appointed by the Judicial Secretary on
the order of the Chief Justice. <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">(5) That
on 18 April 1975 when Mr. F. A. B. Haizel the grade II district court
magistrate resumed hearing of this suit, the substantive grade I district
magistrate was sitting in Cape Coast and as soon as my solicitor discovered
this he wrote his letter reference No. DDA/75/2 dated 25 April 1975 to the
registrar to point out the irregular conduct in this suit by the said F. A. B.
Haizel. <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">(6) That
I am advised and verily believe same to be true that the said Mr. F. A. B.
Haizel has never been enrolled as a barrister or solicitor much less so has he
ever practised as a barrister or solicitor. <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 advised and verily believe same to be true that the said Mr. F. A. B.
Haizel does not qualify to be made a grade I magistrate. <o:p></o:p>