THE REPUBLIC vs. HIGH COURT, SEKONDI EX PARTE GEORGE KINGSLEY KWEKU AMPONG A.K.A ODENEHO AKROFA KRUKOKO II NANA KWADU AKEREFO III, NANA KOBINA ANGU II, NANA KWANDOH BREMPONG III, NANA KWAW AMAOH II, NANA KWABENA GYAN II AND NANA AMPONG KWASI II [2012]DLCA7957

THE REPUBLIC vs. HIGH COURT, SEKONDI EX PARTE GEORGE KINGSLEY KWEKU AMPONG A.K.... [2012]DLCA7957

Date	2012-01-11
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. H1/10/2012
Citation No.	[2012]DLCA7957

MARFUL-SAU JA

(PRESIDING)

HONYENUGA JA

BENSON J

[2012]DLCA7957
																																						<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" >THE REPUBLIC<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>HIGH COURT,
SEKONDI<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>EX PARTE
GEORGE KINGSLEY KWEKU AMPONG A.K.A ODENEHO AKROFA KRUKOKO II<o:p></o:p>(APPLICANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>NANA KWADU
AKEREFO III, NANA KOBINA ANGU II, NANA KWANDOH BREMPONG III, NANA&nbsp; KWAW&nbsp;
AMAOH II, NANA KWABENA GYAN II AND NANA AMPONG KWASI II<o:p></o:p>(INTERESTED PARTIES/
RESPONDENTS)<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">

CIVIL
APPEAL NO. H1/10/2012&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>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">

MARFUL-SAU
JA, (PRESIDING), HONYENUGA JA, BENSON J<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">

<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">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>HONYENUGA,
J.A <o:p></o:p>This is an appeal against the judgment of the
High court Sekondi dated the 21st day of December, 2010. The said
court dismissed an application for Judicial Review in the nature of Certiorari
to quash the ruling of the Chieftaincy Tribunal of the Western Region House of
Chiefs. The Applicant/Appellant would be referred to as the appellant and the
interested parties/respondents as the respondents. <o:p></o:p>The
facts of this appeal are &nbsp;that a default
judgment was delivered against the appellant on the 11th day of June
2010 by the chieftaincy Tribunal&nbsp; of the
Western Region House of Chiefs in respect of a petition involving his
destoolment. The appellant later filed a motion to&nbsp; set aside the said default judgment. On the
27th October, 2010 the chieftaincy Tribunal dismissed the
appellant’s motion on the grounds that he was in contempt of the said Tribunal
and that&nbsp; there was proof of service of
the petition&nbsp; on him. On these grounds
the appellant filed an application for Judicial Review to bring&nbsp; up to quash the ruling of the chieftaincy
Tribunal &nbsp;dated the 27th
October, 2010 at the High Court Sekondi. <o:p></o:p>The
grounds of his application for certiorari&nbsp;
include:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp; “a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Abuse
of legal process<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp; b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Contempt
of the High court, Kumasi<o:p></o:p>&nbsp; c. Jurisdiction
error<o:p></o:p>&nbsp; d. Breach of the rules of Natural Justice or
the duty to be fair.<o:p></o:p>e. Collusion between the panel members of the chieftaincy
Tribunal, the interested parties and the Lawyers for the interested parties.<o:p></o:p>f. Non compliance with the chieftaincy Act, 2008 Section
33(8).<o:p></o:p>g. Abuse of process by forestalling or pre-empting the judgment
of the High Court, Kumasi.<o:p></o:p>The respondent
filed an affidavit in opposition and submitted that the application is wholly
unmentorious and must be dismissed. They stated that they filed a&nbsp; petition&nbsp;
before the Judicial committee of the Western&nbsp; Regional House of Chiefs against the
appellant who was duly served by a search conducted. According to them, the
appellant was also served with a hearing notice and that his own search
conducted at the Registry of the said Committee revealed that he was served.
The Judicial Committee having satisfied themselves that the appellant was served,
proceeded with the hearing of the matter and delivered judgment perpetually restraining
the appellant from holding himself up as the Omanhene of the Wassa Fiase
Tradit</main>