AZORBLIE AND OTHERS vs. ANKRAH IV [1985]DLCA889

Date	1985-11-20
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1985]DLCA889

ADADE J.S.C

AMUAH-SEKYI J

AMPIAH J.

SAMMY TAY FOR THE APPLICANTS.

ARMSTRONG ACKUAKU FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1985]DLCA889
																																						<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" ><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

AZORBLIE AND OTHERS <o:p></o:p>

{COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA} <o:p></o:p>

[1984-86] 1 GLR 561<o:p></o:p>

DATE:
20 NOVEMBER 1985<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>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">

SAMMY TAY FOR THE APPLICANTS.<o:p></o:p>

ARMSTRONG ACKUAKU 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">

ADADE J.S.C, AMUAH-SEKYI AND AMPIAH JJ.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ADADE J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>Adade
J.S.C delivered the ruling of the court. On 5 November 1985 the defendants, by
counsel, filed a “motion on notice” in this court asking: “for an order of
prohibition against the High Court, Ho presided over by Apatu-Plange J. from
hearing the above suit, and for such other orders as this honourable court may
deem fit.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The main
ground for the application is that the suit before the High Court, Ho is a
chieftaincy matter which the court has no jurisdiction to entertain.
Unfortunately, the applicants contend, the High Court insists on hearing the
matter, notwithstanding objections by them.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Mr
Armstrong Ackuaku, for the plaintiff-respondent, objects to the Court of Appeal
hearing the defendants’ motion on the ground that this court has no jurisdiction.
He says in his notice of preliminary objection that: “a motion for prohibition
is not maintainable at the Court of Appeal at first instance.” He argues that
the Court of Appeal has no supervisory jurisdiction over the High Court.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Mr Tay on
the other hand says that the Court of Appeal has an inherent jurisdiction to
deal with any application at all, prerogative writs included, particularly
where, he contends, it is apparent that the High Court is not acting within its
jurisdiction.<o:p></o:p>Jurisdiction
is no more than the power of a court to deal with a matter. It is defined by
Coussey J.A. in the case of Timitimi v. Amabebe (1953) 14 W.A.C.A 374 at 376
as, “the power or authority to judge.” He continues:<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">“A court
is said to be of competent jurisdiction with regard to a suit or other
proceeding when it has power to hear or determine it or exercise any judicial
power therein.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
powers of this court are set out in article 122 of the of the Constitution,
1979 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">“122. (1)
The Court of Appeal shall have jurisdiction throughout Ghana to hear and
determine, subject to the provisions of this article and of this Constitution,
appeals from a judgment, decree or order of the High Court of Justice or a
Justice thereof and such other appellate jurisdiction as may be conferred upon
it by this Constitution or any other law. (2) Except as otherwise provided in
this Constitution, an appeal shall lie as of right from a judgment, decree or
order of the High Court of Justice to the Court of Appeal in any cause or matter
determined by the High Court of Justice. (3) For the purposes of hearing and
determining an appeal within its jurisdiction and the amendment, execution or
the enforcement of a judgment or order made on any such appeal, and for the
purposes of any other authority expressly or by necessary implication given to
the Court of Appeal by this Constitution or any other law, the Court of Appeal
shall have all the powers, authority and jurisdiction vested in the Court from
which the appeal is brought.”<o:p></o:p>