OPANIN KWABENA BOAKYE vs. FRANCIS MANU [2000]DLSC2357

Date	2000-10-18
Suit No.	CM. 13/98
Citation No.	[2000]DLSC2357

WIREDU J.S.C

MRS. J BAMFORD-ADDO J.S.C

AMPIAH J.S.C

ADJABENG J.S.C

ACQUAH J.S.C.

ATUGUBA J.S.C.

MS. AKUFFO J.S.C.

MR. JAMES AHENKORAH FOR THE APPLICANT

MR. J. K. AGYEMANG FOR THE RESPONDENT

[2000]DLSC2357
																																						<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" >OPANIN KWABENA BOAKYE<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>FRANCIS MANU<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME
COURT OF JUSTICE]<o:p></o:p>CM. 13/98<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: 18TH
OCTOBER, 2000.<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
text-align:justify;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">WIREDU J.S.C&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (PRESIDING), MRS. J BAMFORD-ADDO J.S.C, AMPIAH J.S.C, ADJABENG
J.S.C, ACQUAH,
J.S.C., ATUGUBA
J.S.C., MS. AKUFFO
J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>

</div>RULING<o:p></o:p>EDWARD WIREDU, J.S.C.: <o:p></o:p>In the decision I have just read, in
Opanin Kojo Fori &amp; Others v. Opanin Kofi Adjei &amp; Another, C.M. 6/98, I
set out the parameters guiding the exercise of the Supreme Court's review
jurisdiction. In the light of the Court's decision in that case, there is no
doubt in my mind that the instant application offends against the rules and
principles of review. Since the matter before us is an application for review,
rather than appeal, the Court's concern is not with whether or not we agree
with the decision of the Ordinary Bench of the Court. Rather, what concerns us,
and the only consideration which Rule 54 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1996
(C.I.16) permits us to take into account, is whether or not there is any proper
ground for us to exercise our review jurisdiction.<o:p></o:p>For the purpose of this application,
therefore, the question is whether or not the Applicant has demonstrated any
exceptional circumstances connected with the decision, which have resulted in a
miscarriage of justice. The most cursory study of the judgment against which
this applicant has been brought would reveal that the issues raised by Counsel
for the Applicants in his Statement of Case herein are, in substance, the same
as those raised before the Ordinary Bench, and Counsel's arguments are no more
than a rehash of the Applicant's case in the appeal. These issues were
extensively considered in both the minority and the leading majority opinions
in the judgment. The fact that the applicants might have a preference for the
minority views cannot constitute adequate justification for a review of the
judgment.<o:p></o:p>The application has no merit whatsoever
and I have no hesitation in dismissing the same.<o:p></o:p>E. K. WIREDU<o:p></o:p>JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT<o:p></o:p>MRS. BAMFORD-ADDO, J.S.C: <o:p></o:p>I agree.<o:p></o:p>J. BAMFORD-ADDO (MRS.)<o:p></o:p>JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT<o:p></o:p>AMPIAH, J.S.C.:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>I agree.<o:p></o:p>A.K.B. AMPIAH <o:p></o:p>