JAMES BADU (PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT) vs. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR GHANNA HEALTH SERVICE CAPE COAST AND THE MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL SALTPOND (DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS) [2012]DLCA7904

JAMES BADU (PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT) vs. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR GHANNA HEALTH SERVIC... [2012]DLCA7904

Date	2012-01-11
Suit No.	SUIT NO.H3/76/11
Citation No.	[2012]DLCA7904

S.MARFUL-SAU J.A (PRESIDING)

C.J.HONYENUGA J.A

DENNIS D. ADJEI J.A

MRS. HANNA TAYLOR PRINCIPAL STATE ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS/ APPELLANTS

MR. ARTHUR-DADZIE FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

[2012]DLCA7904
																																						<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" >JAMES BADU<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p>THE REGIONAL
DIRECTOR GHANNA HEALTH SERVICE CAPE COAST AND THE MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT
GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL SALTPOND<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, CAPE COAST]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">SUIT NO.H3/76/11&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;&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: 11TH
JANUARY, 2012<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MRS. HANNA TAYLOR, PRINCIPAL STATE ATTORNEY FOR
DEFENDANTS/ APPELLANTS<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

MR.
ARTHUR-DADZIE FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT <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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

S.MARFUL-SAU
J.A (PRESIDING), C.J.HONYENUGA J.A, DENNIS D. ADJEI J.A<o:p></o:p>

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

</div>MARFUL-SAU, JA:-
<o:p></o:p>The
record of this appeal raises fundamental procedural flaws that renders the
entire trial a nullity. The plaintiff/ respondent herein commenced this action
against the defendants/respondents, who clearly are non juristic persons
lacking legal capacity to sue and be sued. The action was commenced against the
Regional Director, Ghana Health Services and the Medical Superintendent,
Government Hospital Saltpond. These two named as defendants in the action are
not legal entities, a fact Counsel for plaintiff/respondent realised in the
course of the trial. Upon this realisation Counsel for the plaintiff/
respondent applied to substitute the two defendants. In this appeal the
plaintiff/respondent shall be referred to as the respondent and the
defendants/appellants known as appellants.<o:p></o:p>At
page 42 of the record of appeal is the motion filed by Counsel for respondent
to substitute the two defendants who lacked capacity as defendants in the
action. The motion for substitution was heard on the 6th December,
2006 at a time that the respondent had called three witnesses and the
respondent himself was in the witness box testifying in chief. In his
submissions to the court at page 44 of the record of appeal, Counsel for the
respondent argued that the defendants in the action were not legal entities
hence the need to substitute them. Counsel for respondent submitted as
follows:-<o:p></o:p>‘’My
Lord, there is an application on for substitution and we are praying this
honourable court that the Attorney Generals Department be substituted for the
Regional Director, Ghana Health Services and the Medical Superintendent,
Government Hospital Saltpond. Because, the two defendants are not legal
entities that can be sued. So we are praying that the Attorney Generals
Department be substituted for those two institutions. And we attached herewith
a copy of the notice that we sent out in compliance with the State Proceedings
Act 555.’’<o:p></o:p>Pursuant
to this submission which was not opposed by Counsel for the appellants herein,
the court granted the application as follows:-<o:p></o:p>‘’By Court:- The application
is granted and the Attorney-General’s Department should be the defendants in
this case from today.’’<o:p></o:p>The
first observation that I make with the submission by counsel for the respondent
and the order of the court is that instead of applying to substitute the
Attorney General, Counsel for the respondent applied to join the </main>