EBUSUAPANYIN KOFI ANDOH & ORS vs. EBUSUAPANYIN ASI YAW [2016]DLCA4647

Date	2016-05-23
Suit No.	SUIT NO.H1/14/2014
Citation No.	[2016]DLCA4647

HONYENUGA JA (PRESIDING)

GYAN J.A

SUURBAAREH JA

[2016]DLCA4647
																																						<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" >EBUSUAPANYIN
KOFI ANDOH &amp; ORS&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>EBUSUAPANYIN ASI YAW <o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<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:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

SUIT NO.H1/14/2014&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE: 23RD
MAY, 2016<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">

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

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

</div>SAEED K. GYAN,
JA<o:p></o:p>I have had the privilege of reading before hand the judgment of my
worthy brother Suurbaareh, JA and I entirely agree with his conclusion that
this interlocutory appeal should be disallowed or&nbsp; otherwise that it ought not to be
granted.&nbsp; I would however like to discuss
aspect of&nbsp; this case bordering on
procedure which I believe bears considering in relation to the competence of
the step taken by the Defendants/Applicants/Appellants herein to ensure an
early or precipitous ending of the case brought against them by the Plaintiff/Respondent/Respondent
herein without determining the case on the merits through a plenary trial.<o:p></o:p>It has always been a fundamental principle of the law that unless in the
clearest cases, a party should not be debarred from the judgment seat before they
have been heard as required by law.<o:p></o:p>It is equally a principle of considerable eminence that where a stature
sets out preconditions which are mandatory in order to access a relief “ a
person entitled to take a step under the statute would not have any authority
to do so”&nbsp; unless he follows the
procedures enjoined under the statute.&nbsp;
See JONAH VRS. KULENDI &amp;
KULENDI [2013-2014] 1 SC GLR 272.<o:p></o:p>Anin Yeboah JSC has stated that “the courts have shown remarkable
consistency” in upholding the principle that mandatory preconditions in
statutes ought to be complied with before steps could be validly taken.<o:p></o:p>His Lordship Mr. Anin Yeboah strongly emphasized this matter in the now
celebrated case of HENRY NUERTEY
KOBOE VRS. FRANCIS AMOSA; CIVIL
APPEAL No. 34/56/2014 dated 21/04/2016 (unreported) where the Supreme
Court of Ghana, by a majority decision declared that a court process prepared
and filed by a Lawyer without the requisite Solicitors License was invalid and
void and ought not to be countenanced by the court despite the far-reaching or
eventual consequences that could have on the so called innocent litigant, who
is the client of the erring Lawyer.<o:p></o:p>See also; AFRANIE II VRS.&nbsp; QUARCOO &amp;&nbsp;
OR. [1992] 2 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; GLR 561,
SC;&nbsp; REPUBLIC VRS. DISTRICT MAGISTARTE,
ACCRA; EX PARTE ADIO [1972] 2 GLR 125.<o:p></o:p>To my mind the question which irresistibly confronts us in the instant
case is whether the procedure adopted by the Defendants to ensure a truncation
of the case or otherwise to achieve an early dismissal of the case against them
was correct, valid or competent. <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;It may be useful to set out the
background of this case.<o:p></o:p>The Plaintiff/Respondent/Respondent&nbsp;
herein [hereafter referred to as the Plaintiff) commenced on action at
the Circuit Court, Agona Swedru against the Defendants) Applicants/Appellants
herein [hereafter referred to as Defendants] seeking the following relief:<o:p></o:p><span style="mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">(1)&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;A declaration of title and recovery of
possession of all that large tract of land approximately thirty (30) acres
bounded on the North by Ebusuapanyin Sockeyes land on the South by 1st
Aboradze family of Agona Nyarkrom’s land on the East by Agona Nsaba/Okeseku’s
land on the West by 1st Aboradze family of Agona Nyarkrom’s land.<o:p></o:p>