THE REPUBLIC vs. HIGH COURT, (GENERAL JURISDICTION) ACCRA EX-PARTE: RICHARD KWABENA AND OTHERS [2016]DLSC2824

THE REPUBLIC vs. HIGH COURT, (GENERAL JURISDICTION) ACCRA EX-PARTE: RICHARD KWAB... [2016]DLSC2824

Date	2016-07-28
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J5/17/2016
Citation No.	[2016]DLSC2824

GBADEBGE JSC (PRESIDING)

AKOTO - BAMFO JSC

BENIN JSC

APPAU JSC

PWAMANG JSC

KWEKU PAINTSTIL FOR THE APPLICANT.

NO APPEARANCE FOR THE INTERESTED PARTY.

[2016]DLSC2824
																																						<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, (GENERAL
JURISDICTION)<o:p></o:p>ACCRA EX-PARTE: RICHARD
KWABENA AND OTHERS<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. J5/17/2016&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&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:
28TH JULY, 2016<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;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&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>KWEKU
PAINTSTIL 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">

NO
APPEARANCE 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">

GBADEBGE
JSC (PRESIDING), AKOTO - BAMFO JSC, BENIN JSC, APPAU JSC, AND PWAMANG 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 0in 0in">

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

</div>GBADEGBE
JSC:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>The simple question for our decision
turning on the application before us for judicial review in the nature of
certiorari is whether the learned trial judge of the High Court acted within
jurisdiction when he made an order on February 08, 2016 that the applicant (a
defendant to the action before the trial High Court) to give bail for his
appearance in a civil action by virtue of Order 73 of the High Court (Civil
Procedure Rules), CI 16.&nbsp; From the
impugned order , which appears at page 1 of what is loosely described as
Exhibit “A” series, the learned trial judge did not as required by the rules
afford the applicant, the opportunity of showing cause why he should not
provide good and sufficient cause for his appearance in the action. The
obligation imposed on the learned trial judge is expressed in the following
words of Order 73 rule1 sub-rule (2) and rule (2) thus:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (2).“
Where the court is satisfied that the provisions in paragraph (a) or (b) of
sub-rule (1) have been substantiated and that the execution of any judgment in
the action against the defendant is likely to be obstructed or delayed, it may
issue a warrant to bring the defendant before the Court to show cause why the
defendant should not give good and sufficient bail for the defendant’s
appearance.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Where
the defendant fails to show cause, the Court shall order the defendant to give
bail for the defendant’s appearance at any time while the action is pending and
the execution or satisfaction of any judgment that may be given against the
defendant in the action, and the surety shall undertake to pay any money that
may be adjudged to be paid by the defendant in the action, in default of the
appearance of the defendant.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>&nbsp;We venture to say without any hesitation that the
order for bail arises only when following his appearance before the court under
a warrant issued under order 73&nbsp; rule (1)
sub-rule (2), he is unable to show cause as provided for in rule 2 of the Order.
The order for bail so made upon his failure to satisfy the court in regard to
his appearance while the action is pending may be likened to bail in criminal
cases. The purpose of the bail granted to the defendant is to ensure that he
appears not only at the trial but as some form of security that any judgment
obtained against him in the action may be satisfied. It seems therefore that
the failure of the </main>