JOSEPHINE AKITA vs. MRS. SALMA F. MANCELL–EGALA AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL [2009]DLCA5003

Date	2009-10-22
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL SUIT NO. H3/483/2009
Citation No.	[2009]DLCA5003

MARFUL-SAU JA (PRESIDING)

AYEBI JA

ADUAMA-OSEI JA

MR. KIZITO BEYUOFOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/APPLICANT

MR. KWAME B. AKUFFO FOR THE 1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

MR. CECIL ADADEVOH (SENIOR STATE ATTORNEY) FOR 2ND DEFENDANT

[2009]DLCA5003
																																						<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" >JOSEPHINE AKITA <o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MRS. SALMA F. MANCELL–EGALA
AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/ RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<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">

CIVIL APPEAL SUIT NO. H3/483/2009&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: 22ND OCTOBER, 2009<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR. KIZITO BEYUOFOR THE
PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/APPLICANT<o:p></o:p>MR. KWAME B. AKUFFO FOR
THE 1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT<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">

MR.
CECIL ADADEVOH (SENIOR STATE ATTORNEY) FOR 2ND DEFENDANT<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 1.0pt 0in">

MARFUL-SAU
JA (PRESIDING), AYEBI JA , ADUAMA-OSEI JA<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">

RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>MARFUL-SAU JA; <o:p></o:p>This application seeks to stay the execution of the
decision of the High Court, Accra dated the 18th May, 2009, ordering
the Government of Ghana to take over the school, namely Mancell Vocational
Institute immediately.<o:p></o:p>The Plaintiff/Appellant/Applicant
herein referred to as Applicant by her writ of summons against the
Defendants/Respondents claimed the following reliefs:-<o:p></o:p><ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="1">
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">Declaration
 that the purported sale in May 2008 by the 1st defendant to the
 government of Ghana of Mancell Vocational Institute without the consent of
 the children of Elizabeth Mansa Mancel (deceased) is a nullity.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">An
 order setting aside the purported sale referred to above.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">An
 order of perpetual injunction restraining the government of Ghana, its
 agents and&nbsp; assigns from taking over
 or acting in any manner inconsistent with the beneficial interest of the
 children of Elizabeth Mansa Mancell in Mancell Vocational Institute,
 Kumasi.<o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>Pursuant
to her writ of summons, the Applicant applied for an order of interlocutory
injunction to restrain the 2nd defendant/respondent from taking over
Mancell vocational Institute.&nbsp; The High
Court on the 18th May 2009 refused the application for injunction
and proceeded to dismiss the plaintiff action in limine on &nbsp;grounds that the plaintiff lacked capacity to
institute the action against the respondents.&nbsp;
Dissatisfied with the decision of the High Court, the applicant
instituted this appeal on the same 18th of May 2009, by which the
applicant complained about the decision of the High Court refusing the
interlocutory injunction and the decision dismissing the action in limine.<o:p></o:p>The
applicant annexed to her application the following documents:- the probate of
the last will of Mrs. Rosamond Mancell marked LQ 1, a Vesting Assent marked LQ2,
the Notice of Appeal marked LQ3 and the ruling of the High Court dated 18th
May 2009, marked as LQ 4.<o:p></o:p>The
respondents opposed the application for stay and filed separate
affidavits.&nbsp; The 1st
respondent exhibited documents marked SF1to SF15.&nbsp; The 2nd respondent also exhibited
documents and these were marked as AG1 to AG7, all annexed to the affidavit in
opposition.<o:p></o:p>Having
heard learned counsels appearing for the parties and upon a careful examination
of the processes filed in this application, we are of the considered opinion
that this application raises a fundamental question, which is, whether or not
the decision by the High Court on the 18th May 2009, ordering the
Government of Ghana to take over Mancell Vocational Institute in Kumasi
immediately was on appeal?; or whether the decision ordering the takeover was a
subject of the appeal filed by the applicant on the 18th of May
2009.<o:p></o:p>From
the processes filed in the application, it is obvious that two decisions were
delivered by the High Court on the 18th May 2009.&nbsp; The first is the main ruling which refused
the application for injunction and dismissing the applicant’s action in limine.
The second decision is the order that the government of Ghana should take over
Mancell Vocational Institute immediately.&nbsp;
Indeed it is the first decision that the applicant exhibited in this
proceeding as exhibit LQ4.&nbsp; We have
carefully read the said ruling marked LQ 4 and observed that nowhere in that
ruling did the court order the Ghana government to take over the institute in
Kumasi. Ironically, t</main>