BAAFOUR KWAME FANTE ADUAMOA II AND 6 OTHERS vs. NANA GYAKORANG ADU TWUM II AND ANOTHER [2000]DLSC6150

BAAFOUR KWAME FANTE ADUAMOA II AND 6 OTHERS vs. NANA GYAKORANG ADU TWUM II AND... [2000]DLSC6150

Date	2000-02-09
Suit No.	SUIT NO. 3/94
Citation No.	[2000]DLSC6150

WIREDU J.S.C (PRESIDING)

BAMFORD-ADDO (MRS.) J.S.C.

AMPIAH J.S.C.

ADJABENG J.S.C

ACQUAH J.S.C

ATUGUBA J.S.C

AKUFFO (MS.) J.S.C.

MR. NUTIFAFA KUENYEHIA FOR THE PLAINTIFFS

DR. TWUM FOR THE DEFENDANTS MR. AFRIFA GYASIE CHIEF STATE

ATTORNEY FOR THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL

[2000]DLSC6150
																																						<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" >BAAFOUR
KWAME FANTE ADUAMOA II AND 6 OTHERS<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NANA GYAKORANG ADU TWUM
II AND ANOTHER<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS)<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">

[SUPREME COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">SUIT NO. 3/94&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; DATE: 9TH FEBRUARY, 2000<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">

MR.
NUTIFAFA KUENYEHIA FOR THE PLAINTIFFS <o:p></o:p>

DR.
TWUM FOR THE DEFENDANTS MR. AFRIFA GYASIE, CHIEF STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE
ATTORNEY-GENERAL<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">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
115%;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 0in 0in">WIREDU
J.S.C (PRESIDING), BAMFORD-ADDO (MRS.) J.S.C., AMPIAH J.S.C., ADJABENG J.S.C,
ACQUAH J.S.C, ATUGUBA J.S.C, AKUFFO (MS.) J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:
none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;
mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>ACQUAH, JSC: <o:p></o:p>My
Lords, the original jurisdiction vested in the Supreme Court by articles 2(1)
and 130(1) of the 1992 Constitution to interpret and enforce the provisions of
the Constitution, is a special jurisdiction meant to be invoked in suits
raising genuine or real issues of <o:p></o:p>—
the interpretation of a provision of the Constitution or <o:p></o:p>—
the enforcement of a provision of the Constitution, or <o:p></o:p>—
a question whether an enactment was made ultra vires Parliament, or any other
authority or person by law or under the constitution. <o:p></o:p>See:
Gbedemah vrs. Awoonor-Williams, (1969) 2 G&amp;G 438 Tait, vrs Ghana Airways
Corporation (1970)2 G &amp; G 527, Yiadom vrs Amaniampong (1981) GLR 3 SC,
Edusei vrs Attorney-General (1996-97) SCGLR 1, Edusei vrs. Attorney General
(No.2) CM 21/96, 22nd April 1998 SC (unreported), Republic vrs. Special
Tribunal ex parte Akosah (1980) GLR 592 CA. <o:p></o:p>This
special jurisdiction is not meant to usurp, or to be resorted to in place of,
any of the jurisdictions of a lower court. In other words, where our said jurisdiction
has been invoked in an action which properly falls within a particular course
of action at a lower court, this court shall refuse to assume jurisdiction in
that action, notwithstanding the fact that it has been presented as an
interpretation and/or enforcement suit. For a large number of actions which
fall within specific causes of action can be presented in the form of
interpretation and/or enforcement actions. For example, if someone goes to farm
or commences building on another person’s land, the latter can file a suit at
the Supreme Court invoking its original jurisdiction for a declaration that the
said entry unto his land, constitutes an invasion of his right to his property
under article 18 of the 1992 Constitution, damages for such violation, and an
order to recover his property. But it is quite clear that such a suit is really
a land suit falling within the jurisdiction of the lower court with the
authority to handle claims of the value of the land in dispute. <o:p></o:p>In
Tait vrs. Ghana Airways Corporation (1970) 2 G &amp; G 527 the plaintiff, a
pilot, was employed by the defendant in written service agreement dated 1st
January 1967. On 24th April 1967, a DC-3 plane he was piloting from Kumasi to
Accra crashed in a field near Takoradi with a loss of a passenger. He was
suspended 'without prejudice' and an enquiry into the cause of the crash was
held. The report of the enquiry was presented to the Government and his
suspension was withdrawn. But in a letter dated 29th May 1970 signed by the
managing director of the defendant, he was informed that his service with the
defendant were no longer required and ordered to vacate his official bungalow.
Dissatisfied with the termination of his services he invoked the original
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under article 106(1)(a) of the 1969
Constitution (the equivalent of article 130(1)(a) of the 1992 Constitution) for
<o:p></o:p>“(a)
A declaration that his dismissal from the employment of the defendant
corporation communicated to the plaintiff by letter dated 29th May 1970
purporting to be signed by the managing director of defendant c</main>