THE REPUBLIC vs. HIGH COURT, ACCRA (RESPONDENT) EX-PARTE NII NUEH ODONKOR (APPLICANT) AND THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ECONOMIC AND ORGANISED CRIME OFFICE & 2 OTHERS [2014]DLSC5029

THE REPUBLIC vs. HIGH COURT, ACCRA (RESPONDENT) EX-PARTE NII NUEH ODONKOR (APPLI... [2014]DLSC5029

Date	2014-07-10
Suit No.	CIVIL MOTION No: J5/26/2014
Citation No.	[2014]DLSC5029

W. A. ATUGUBA JSC (PRESIDING)

J. V. M. DOTSE JSC

N. S. GBADEGBE JSC

A. A. BENIN JSC

J. B. AKAMBA JSC

HON. ALEXANDER KWAMENA AFENYO MARKIN ESQ. WITH HIM MISS BERNINA

KORKOR OKUTU FOR THE APPLICANT.

JACQUELINE AVOTRI FOR THE INTERESTED PARTY.

[2014]DLSC5029
																																						<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>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>EX-PARTE NII NUEH
ODONKOR (APPLICANT) AND THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR ECONOMIC AND ORGANISED CRIME OFFICE &amp; 2 OTHERS (INTERESTED
PARTIES)<o:p></o:p>[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">

<p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">CIVIL
MOTION No: J5/26/2014&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 10TH
JULY 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>HON. ALEXANDER KWAMENA AFENYO MARKIN ESQ. WITH HIM
MISS BERNINA KORKOR OKUTU FOR THE APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>JACQUELINE AVOTRI FOR THE INTERESTED PARTY.<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">CORAM: 
W. A. ATUGUBA JSC (PRESIDING), J.&nbsp; V. M. DOTSE JSC, N. S. GBADEGBE JSC, A. A.
BENIN JSC, J.&nbsp; B. AKAMBA JSC<o:p></o:p>

</div><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:
.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in;
mso-border-between:1.5pt solid windowtext;mso-padding-between:1.0pt">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>DISSENTING
OPINION<o:p></o:p>DOTSE JSC:- <o:p></o:p>I
have been privileged to have read the opinion of my worthy and respected brother
Atuguba JSC and President of the Court to the effect that the instant
application has been woefully filed out of time in terms of rule 62 of the
Supreme Court Rules 1996, C. I. 16 and therefore ought to be dismissed.<o:p></o:p>The
said opinion has agitated my mind and given me anxious moments and the more I
consider it, the more I feel a lot of injustice would be caused the Applicant
if I should follow that line of thinking.<o:p></o:p>I
am not unaware that in deciding to write this dissenting opinion, I am in the minority
as my brethren have all decided to go along with the decision of Atuguba JSC.<o:p></o:p>Nonetheless,
I am determined to press on to give the reasons why I hold a contrary view and
opinion and also why I departed from the views of the majority of the Court.<o:p></o:p>The
1st Interested Party in this case has contended that the Applicants
application has been filed out of time and therefore in flagrant violation of
rule 62 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1996 C. I. 16.<o:p></o:p>The
1st Interested Party also contended that an appeal is a suitable
remedy which they claimed the Applicant has already filed.<o:p></o:p>I
will therefore promptly deal with these preliminary issues before I deal with
the substantive application.<o:p></o:p>Notice of Preliminary Objections<o:p></o:p>I
have taken the view that, the instant application has not lapsed under rule 62
of C. I. 16 as contended by the Interested Parties. <o:p></o:p>It
is trite procedure that whenever a party conceived that a decision, ruling or
order made or given by a trial court, in this instant the High Court has not
been well made out, due to a variety of factors inter alia because a party was
not heard or a process which ought to be served had not been served etc, that
party is entitled to go back to the trial court to seek to set aside the order,
ruling or decision complained of on stated legal grounds.<o:p></o:p>It
is only after the refusal by the trial court to set the impugned order, ruling
or decision aside that the grounds for the application would be deemed to have
arisen, thereby necessitating the computation of time.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;In determining this issue as to whether this
Application has been brought within time as envisaged under rule 62 of C. I.
16, this court will have to consider the effect of the Ruling of the High
Court, Financial Division on 14th March 2014, which was a ruling premised
upon an application made to the court to set aside its confiscation orders made
by the Court.<o:p></o:p>It
should be noted that, it was this Ruling of 14th March 2014which
completely shut the door on the Applicant in the pursuit of his rights to get
the High Court to overturn the confiscation orders made earlier on.<o:p></o:p>