THE REPUBLIC vs. THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS & DEATHS, EX PARTE: PHILIP K. AMOH AND URSULA AMOH [2017]DLHC4043

THE REPUBLIC vs. THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS & DEATHS, EX PARTE: PHILIP K. AMOH AND... [2017]DLHC4043

Date	2017-09-05
Suit No.	SUIT NO. GJ/751/2017
Citation No.	[2017]DLHC4043

KWEKU T. ACKAAH-BOAFO JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

IRIS K. AGGREY-ORLEANS FOR THE APPLICANT

MS. ENID MARFUL SAU FOR THE RESPONDENT

[2017]DLHC4043
																																						<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>THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS
&amp; DEATHS, EX PARTE: PHILIP K. AMOH AND URSULA AMOH
<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT (GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION), 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;margin-left:0in;margin-right:.2in">

SUIT&nbsp;NO. GJ/751/2017&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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:
5TH
SEPTEMBER, 2017<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>IRIS K. AGGREY-ORLEANS 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;margin-left:0in;margin-right:.2in">

</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;margin-left:0in;margin-right:.2in">

KWEKU T. ACKAAH-BOAFO JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT<o:p></o:p>

</div><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-top:1.45pt;margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none"><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;margin-left:0in;margin-right:.2in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-top:1.45pt;margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none;border:none;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">DECISION<o:p></o:p>

</div>APPLICATION ON NOTICE FOR
JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS<o:p></o:p>i.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Introduction/Overview:<o:p></o:p>[1]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The
primary question for resolution in this legal objection is whether the Applicants
have filed the instant application for judicial review out of time pursuant to Order 55 Rule 3 of the High
Court Civil Procedure Rules, 2004 C.I. 47 and therefore their rights
have extinguished.<o:p></o:p>[2]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The
facts of this case are free from complexity. On May 19, 2017 the Applicants
filed at the registry of this Court a Motion on Notice for Judicial Review
pursuant to Order 55 of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules, 2004 C.I.
47 for an order in the nature of Mandamus
to compel the Registrar of Births and Deaths to register the birth of their
son. The contention of the Applicants is that following the birth of their son
on June 4, 2016 at the Korle Bu Teaching Hospital they chose to name him Nana
Kwame Boateng Amoh. <o:p></o:p>[3]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; From
the affidavit evidence on record, the Applicants say on September 13, 2016 “we attempted
to register the birth of our son…but the official in charge of the Birth and
Death Registration stationed at Legon hospital refused to register him”.
According to them, the Officer explained that he would not register the child
if the Applicants wanted to maintain “Nana” as part of his name. The official
insisted that they could only register the child as “Kwame Boateng Amoh”. The
record further shows that on September 20, 2016 the Applicants again attempted
to register their son at Korle Bu Teaching Hospital but again the Officer in
charge refused and insisted that they remove the “Nana” from the name. <o:p></o:p>[4]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; According
to the Applicants they caused their lawyers to write to the Registrar of Births
and Deaths to demand that their son be registered in accordance with the law
but up until the date of filing the instant application, the Registrar had
refused to respond. A copy of the letter is attached as Exhibit “A” to the
application. <o:p></o:p>[5]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Now,
after been served with the application learned Counsel for the Respondent from
the Attorney General’s office has filed a Notice of Preliminary Legal Objection
against the hearing of the application based on the grounds that the
application was filed out of time. According to the Respondent pursuant to
Order 55 Rule 3(1), the time within which an application for judicial review
should be brought is not later than six (6) months from the date of the
occurrence of the event upon which the application is premised. According to
the Respondent the occurrence date complained of is 13th and 20th
September 2016 and the application was filed on 19th May, 2017 and
therefore the instant application has been brought nine (9) </main>