THE REPUBLIC vs. HIGH COURT, ACCRA EX-PARTE; GHANA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION [2012]DLSC2598

Date	2012-04-25
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J5/8/2012
Citation No.	[2012]DLSC2598

DR. DATE-BAH JSC (PRESIDING)

ANSAH JSC

DOTSE JSC

BONNIE JSC

BAMFO (MRS) JSC

NENE AMEGATCHER (WITH HIM DOMINIC BRENYA-OTCHERE) FOR THE APPLICANT.

DAVID ANNAN FOR THE INTERESTED PARTY.

[2012]DLSC2598
																																						<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>vs.<o:p></o:p>HIGH COURT, ACCRA<o:p></o:p>EX-PARTE; GHANA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[SUPREME COURT, 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 NO. J5/8/2012&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;DATE: 25TH APRIL, 2012<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>NENE
AMEGATCHER (WITH HIM DOMINIC BRENYA-OTCHERE) FOR THE APPLICANT.<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">

DAVID
ANNAN FOR THE INTERESTED PARTY.<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">

DR.
DATE-BAH JSC (PRESIDING), ANSAH JSC, DOTSE JSC, BONNIE JSC, BAMFO (MRS) JSC<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">

JUDGEMENT&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>ANSAH
JSC.<o:p></o:p>This is
an application by the Ghana Medical Association for judicial review of the
decision of the High Court, Accra, presided over by His Lordship Mr. Justice
Dzakpasu, to prevent him from proceeding with the ruling on the interlocutory
injunction and the substantive matter pending before it intituled: ‘Chris
Archman-Akumey v Ghana Medical Association &amp; others’. In other words, the
application is seeking an order to prohibit the aforementioned judge from
ruling on an application for an order of interim injunction and hearing the
substantive matter in the suit before him.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
affidavit stating the facts and background of the application:<o:p></o:p>The
facts grounding the application are contained in the supporting affidavit filed
on 8-12-2011. In it, the applicant deposed that on 24 October 2011, the
plaintiff, respondent herein, issued a writ of summons and statement of claim
against the Ghana Medical Association (hereinafter called the applicant), for
certain reliefs and followed it with an application for interlocutory
injunction restraining the applicant from embarking on a strike of any kind. On
1st November 2011, the judge stated in court he would like to
determine the matter on its merits.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Subsequently, the chronology of events was
that on 8th November, 2011, the applicants filed an affidavit in
opposition to the application for interim injunction rather belatedly,
whereupon the plaintiff respondent filed a supplementary affidavit in response
thereto. Then the applicant filed a statement of defence in which it raised a
preliminary objection to the application for injunction and also challenged the
capacity of the plaintiff respondent to invoke the jurisdiction of the High
Court in the matter. <o:p></o:p>The
court heard both counsel for the parties argue for and in opposition to the
legal objection thus raised. After arguments from counsel the judge was alleged
to have stated that ‘if he ruled in the plaintiff/respondent’s favor in the
preliminary matter, he would go ahead immediately and rule on the interlocutory
injunction application.’ He then adjourned proceedings to 9th
December 2011 for his ruling.<o:p></o:p>The
applicant deposed further in his affidavit, he construed the plaintiff’s
substantive claim before the court to be that it was to enforce an alleged
breach of human rights; he recited the procedure for invoking the jurisdiction
of the High Court under the Human rights provisions in the constitution, 1992,
in the affidavit in support of application for the injunction. The applicant
took the view that by issuing a writ of summons supported with a statement of
claim purporting to invoke such jurisdiction, the plaintiff respondent invoked
the jurisdiction of the High Court wrongly. The Judge compounded the error by
entertaining it. What he did was not only wrong, but was also contrary to law. <o:p></o:p>Furthermore,
when the judge said he would rule on the interlocutory injunction when the
capacity of the plaintiff had not been investigated and established, he evinced
an inclination of bias.<o:p></o:p>