SAKYI vs. TAKYI [2001]DLCA1260

Date	2001-12-26
Suit No.
Citation No.	[2001]DLCA1260

WOOD JA

FARKYE JA

OWUSU JA

EBOW DAWSON FOR THE APPELLANT.

JAMES AHENKORAH FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[2001]DLCA1260
																																						<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">SAKYI<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">TAKYI<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[2001-2002]
2 GLR 457<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">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="right" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:right;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">Date: 26 DECEMBER 2001<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>EBOW
DAWSON FOR THE APPELLANT.<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">

JAMES
AHENKORAH FOR THE RESPONDENT. <o:p></o:p>

WOOD,
FARKYE AND OWUSU JJA<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>Wood JA.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;At the hearing of this appeal, the
plaintiff-respondent (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) raised a
preliminary objection.<o:p></o:p>The
sum of the argument in support of the objection is that, since the statement of
case was filed well outside the 21-day period, prescribed under rule 20 of the
Court of Appeal Rules, 1997 (CI 19) as amended by the Court of Appeal
(Amendment) Rules 1999 (CI 25), and the defendant-appellant (hereinafter
referred to as the appellant) had not sought to do so with the leave of the
court, the statement so filed is not properly before the court and the
respondent was entitled to ignore it and not bound to file an answer to contest
the appeal.<o:p></o:p>The
appellant’s counsel does not dispute the fact that the appeal was filed outside
the period set out under the rules. His counter argument is that once the
appeal has not been struck out by the court, they were entitled in law, as a
matter of right and without seeking any extension of time, to file their
written submission. A plea that the time be extended them for that very
purpose, the argument went, would become necessary only where the appeal was
going to be struck out on a registrar’s certificate. So that once the registrar
had not exercised his duty under rule 20(2) of CI 25, by notifying the court
that the appellant has not complied with rule 20 of CI 25, they were at liberty
to file the offending statement.<o:p></o:p>Quite
plainly, the rules prescribe the period within which an appellant’s statement
of case may be filed. The rule is so self explanatory it would be prudent to
reproduce it:<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 name="_gjdgxs"></a>“20. (1) An appellant shall within 21 days
of being notified in Form 6 set out in Part 1 of the Schedule that the record
is ready, or within such time as the Court may upon terms direct, file with the
Registrar a written submission of his case based on the grounds of appeal set
out in the notice of appeal and such other grounds of appeal as he may file”<o:p></o:p>The
time limited under rule 20(1) of CI 19 as amended by CI 25 within which the
statement may be filed is 21 days. A shorter or longer period, may also be
directed by the court under rule 20(2) of the CI 19 as amended. In our view,
unless a court specifically directs a shorter or longer period, the time
stipulated under the rules within which an appellant seeking to proceed with an
appeal may file his statement of case is 21 days. The period is mandatory and
hence the use of the word “shall.” The rule does not stipulate, as argued by
appellant counsel, that the period is limited to such time as the appeal shall,
upon a registrar’s certificate be struck out. The rule therefore does not give
any such unfettered discretion to the appellant as contended by counsel. It
does follow that by a clear reading of the rule, and indeed by necessary
implication, after the expiry of the 21-day period, the statement can </main>