REPUBLIC vs. ARMAH AND OTHERS; EX PARTE AMUGI II AND OTHERS [1993]DLCA856

Date	1993-06-03
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1993]DLCA856

ESSIEM JA

AMUAH JA

FORSTER JA

FUI TSIKATA (LED BY JOE REINDORF) FOR THE APPLICANTS.

NII APONSAH FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1993]DLCA856
																																						<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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">ARMAH AND OTHERS; EX PARTE AMUGI II AND OTHERS<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1993-94] 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 1.0pt 0in">

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>FUI TSIKATA (LED BY JOE REINDORF) FOR THE APPLICANTS.<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">

NII APONSAH FOR THE RESPONDENTS. <o:p></o:p>

ESSIEM, AMUAH AND FORSTER JJA<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT OF ESSIEN JA.<o:p></o:p>This is an application by the applicants herein seeking an order:<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">“staying all proceedings in the court below in this suit pending
the hearing and final determination by this court of the appeal herein filed on
8 February 1993 from the ruling of the court below delivered on 26 January
1993.”<o:p></o:p>The application was accompanied by an affidavit sworn to by Nii
Armah alias Todjo in which he swore to certain facts which indicate that as a
result of an objection taken by the respondents to Mr Joe Reindorf appearing
for the applicants, the High Court had ruled upholding the objection.<o:p></o:p>The objection was based on an allegation that counsel for the
applicants in the court below, Mr Joe Reindorf, had acted for the whole family
in an earlier case and that he should not be permitted by the court to appear
for a faction of his former clients against the other faction in the instant
case before the High Court concerning the same subject matter.<o:p></o:p>The objection was upheld by the court below which ruled in part:<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">“When his (Joe Reindorf’s) attention was drawn to paragraph (2) of
exhibit E written by him, he said in 1973 he appeared for a bigger family not
belonging to Korle We, who are claiming part of the land. I would think going
by the above that it is proper and advised that Mr Reindorf withdraws his
representation . . .”<o:p></o:p>There is an appeal now pending before this court against that
ruling.<o:p></o:p>The purpose of this application is therefore to stay the
proceedings before the High Court until the appeal is heard by this court and
hopefully to enable Mr Joe Reindorf to appear for the applicants. The
application was brought under the Court of Appeal Rules, 1962 (LI 218), r 27 as
amended by the Court of Appeal (Amendment) Rules, 1975 (LI 1002). I should
mention that the court below dismissed an oral application for stay pending
appeal.<o:p></o:p>I have considered the submissions of counsel and I am satisfied
that the appeal now pending before this court is not frivolous. However, I have
come to the conclusion that in view of the Supreme Court decision in Takyi v
Ghassoub (Ghana) Ltd [1987-88] 2 GLR 452, SC this court has no jurisdiction to
grant the application before us, namely an application that we stay proceedings
before the High Court pending the hearing and determination of the appeal by Mr
Joe Reindorf’s client.<o:p></o:p>In the case of Takyi v Ghassoub (Ghana) Ltd (supra), this court
granted an application for stay of proceedings in the High Court; on appeal to
the Supreme Court it was held as stated in the headnote that:<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">“(1) the ruling of the Court of Appeal was given without
jurisdiction and was therefore null and void because:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:
5.0pt;margin-left:.75in;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;
mso-pagination:none;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">(a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The Court of Appeal had no original jurisdiction. The</main>