ANNOUS vs. APPOH [1980]DLCA1032

Date	1980-01-10
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1980]DLCA1032

ANIN JA

KINGSLEY-NYINAH JA

CHARLES CRABBE J.A.

T. A. TAGOE FOR THE APPLICANT.

E. K. GBEHO FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1980]DLCA1032
																																						<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" >ANNOUS <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>APPOH<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[1980] GLR 883<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:
10 JANUARY 1980<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">

T. A. TAGOE FOR THE APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>

E. K. GBEHO 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">

ANIN, KINGSLEY-NYINAH AND CHARLES
CRABBE JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ANIN J.A.<o:p></o:p>When a
court announces its decision on one date and hands down its reasons for the
decision on a later date, what, for the purpose of calculating the time limited
for appeal or review, is the date of the court’s decision? This in a nutshell
is the important question raised by this unpretentious motion for extension of
time within which to apply for a review.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
undisputed facts are that the plaintiff recovered judgment in the trial Circuit
Court, Accra, on 22 November 1977 for recovery of possession to a plot of land
at Korle-Bu Nmenmete and for other ancillary reliefs. The aggrieved defendant
thereupon appealed to this court; and after a full hearing, the ordinary bench
of this court (coram Apaloo C.J. Sowah and Anin JJ.A.) on 13 February 1979
allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the court below, while
reserving its reasons for a later date. The decision of the ordinary bench
dated 13 February 1979 was in the following terms:<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">“We allow
the appeal and set aside the judgment appealed from together with the order for
costs. The costs, if paid, should be refunded to the appellant. In lieu of the
judgment, we dismiss the plaintiff’s claim and enter judgment for the
defendant. We award the defendant costs in the court below assessed at ¢600 and
costs in this court fixed at ¢700. We hereby discharge the order of interim
injunction made by the court below on 29 October 1975. We will set out full
reasons for our judgment later.”<o:p></o:p>On 29
March 1979, the ordinary bench handed down its reasons for the judgment in open
court after due notice to the parties. The final paragraph reads:<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">“In our
opinion, on the totality of the evidence given to the court, the learned judge
ought to have found in the appellant’s favour both on the issue of title and
the consequential question of trespass. As he found otherwise, we thought his
judgment was wrong and we accordingly set it aside on 13 February last.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>By a
motion on notice filed on 27 September 1979, the plaintiff-applicant
(hereinafter referred to as the applicant) sought an order for extension of
time within which to apply to the full bench of the Court of Appeal for review
of the ordinary bench’s judgment “dated 29 March 1979,” on a stated ground of
alleged miscarriage of justice.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>For the
defendant-respondent (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) learned
counsel took a preliminary objection to the competency of the motion. He first
submitted that the operative date of the decision of the ordinary bench was 13
February 1979 and not 29 March 1979 (the date of the reasons for the decision).
He next contended that the relevant enactments, i.e. section 6 of the
Courts(Amendment) Decree, 1972 (N.R.C.D. 101), and the Supreme Court Rules,
1970 (C.I. 13), r. 8 prescribe a maximum period of six months for the lodging
of appeals or applications for review from a final decision; consequently, time
ran out for the application on 13 August 1979; and that this court was
incompetent to entertain same.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In reply,
learned counsel for the applicant maintained that the operative date of the
judgment of the ordinary bench was 29 March 1979, the date of delivery </main>