GENERAL LEGAL COUNSEL vs. JAMES ABIADUKA [2017]DLCA4759

Date	2017-01-17
Suit No.
Citation No.	[2017]DLCA4759

LOVELACE-JOHNSON JA

KIZITO BEYUO FOR THE APPELLANT

KWEKU PAINTSIL FOR THE RESPONDENT

[2017]DLCA4759
																																						<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" >GENERAL LEGAL COUNSEL&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>JAMES ABIADUKA <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, 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">

SUIT
NO:&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 17TH JANUARY,
2017<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>KIZITO BEYUO FOR THE
APPELLANT <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">

KWEKU
PAINTSIL FOR THE RESPONDENT<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><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">

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

</div>LOVELACE-JOHNSON
JA<o:p></o:p>The respondent on 6/12/2016 filed an
application in the form of a motion to dismiss an appeal filed by the appellant
as incompetent.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Counsel for the appellant raises a
preliminary legal objection to the above on the, grounds that:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:58.5pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;
text-align:justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph;text-indent:-22.5pt;mso-list:
l0 level1 lfo1">(1)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This
court lacks jurisdiction to hear the said application because it has been filed
prematurely. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:58.5pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;
text-align:justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph;text-indent:-22.5pt;mso-list:
l0 level1 lfo1">(2)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Neither
the motion paper nor the supporting affidavit&nbsp;
<o:p></o:p>disclose the basis of the
“legal point” raised.<o:p></o:p>I will consider the second ground
first. In his response to this, counsel for the respondent states in paragraphs
3&amp;4 of the affidavit in support provide the necessary facts upon which the
present application is based.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In dealing with the preliminary legal
objection raised, the court will not consider as enjoined by the authorities-
the contents of the affidavit in support. The contents of the said affidavit
will be considered if the court finds it proper to hear and determine the
motion on its merits after giving a ruling on the present preliminary legal
objection. In expatiating on the first </main>