STANBIC BANK GHANA LIMITED vs. OKOBENG MINING COMPANY LTD [2020]DLHC9252

Date	2020-01-15
Suit No.	SUIT NO. TMISC 3/2019
Citation No.	[2020]DLHC9252

P. BRIGHT MENSAH JUSTICE OF THE APPEAL SITTING AS AN ADDITIONAL HIGH COURT JUDGE

ALEX OSEI OWUSU FOR THE RESPONDENT/APPLICANT

DORA OCQUAYE NORTEY FOR THE APPLICNT/RESPONDENT

[2020]DLHC9252
																																						<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" >IN THE MATTER OF THE
FINANCE LEASE ACT, 1993 (PNDCL 331)<o:p></o:p>AND<o:p></o:p>IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:<o:p></o:p>STANBIC BANK GHANA LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(APPLICANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>OKOBENG MINING COMPANY LTD<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT/APPLICANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, SEKONDI]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

SUIT
NO. TMISC 3/2019&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 15TH
JANUARY, 2020<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>ALEX OSEI OWUSU FOR THE
RESPONDENT/APPLICANT<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

DORA
OCQUAYE NORTEY FOR THE APPLICNT/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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

P.
BRIGHT MENSAH JUSTICE OF THE APPEAL SITTING AS AN ADDITIONAL HIGH COURT JUDGE<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

</div>Against the backdrop of a motion on
notice filed in this case on 25/11/2019, the respondent/applicant prays for
leave for an extension of time to appeal against the decision of this court
handed down on 03/05/2019.&nbsp; By that order
the court decided that the Stanbic Bank [the applicant/respondent] was entitled
to recover forthwith, the excavators, the subject matter of finance lease
agreement the bank made with Okobeng Mining Company [the respondent/applicant].<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>I have decided to consider and
determine the instant application based on the processes filed on record
without inviting legal arguments since the issue raised is purely legal and can
dispose of the case of without any assistance from lawyers in the case.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On the authorities, where parties have
filed their respective processes in connection with an application, the court
has the jurisdiction to consider and determine it without even inviting
arguments from Counsel.&nbsp; See: R
v Court of Appeal; Exparte Eastern Alloy Co. Ltd (2007-2008) SCGLR 371.<o:p></o:p>Guided
by the law, I hold that the instant application is incompetent and ought to be
dismissed on the ground the respondent/applicant has waived and consequently
lost its right to appeal against the decision of the court within the statutory
period.<o:p></o:p>It
bears stressing that all appeals are statutorily conferred either by the
Constitution or an Act of Parliament.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;Appeals are not conferred by common law or
inferred from judicial decisions.&nbsp; If a
statute does not confer jurisdiction the appellate court lacks jurisdiction to
entertain and hear an appeal.&nbsp; Therefore,
a party who intends to invoke the appellate jurisdiction of a court, must
strictly comply and or satisfy the law that grants him that right of
appeal.&nbsp; In&nbsp; Sandema-Nab v Asangalisa &amp; ors
(1996-97) SCGLR 306 the Supreme Court reiterated the principle as
follows:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; “……………..
an appeal is a creature of statute and therefore no has an inherent&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; right to it.&nbsp; Where a statute does not provide for right of
appeal, no court has jurisdiction to confer that right in a dispute determined
under that statute.&nbsp; Similarly, where
a right of appeal is conferred as of right or with leave or special leave, the
right is to be exercised within the four corners of that statute and the
relevant procedural regulations, as a court will not have jurisdiction to grant
deviations outside the parameters of that statute.”&nbsp; [emphasis
underscored] <o:p></o:p>In Re Amponsah (1960) GLR 184 the
Supreme Court held that an appellate court has no jurisdiction to entertain an
appeal from any court below it unless a right of appeal is conferred by
statute.&nbsp;&nbsp; It is beyond any per-adventure that by S.
21(4) of the Courts Act, 1993 (Act 459), an appellate court shall not
entertain any appeal unless all conditions of appeal were fulfilled. <o:p></o:p>In the instant case, the decision that
respondent/applicant seeks leave to appeal against was delivered on
03/05/2019.&nbsp; By operation of law, the
respondent/ applicant had 3 months within which to appeal as of right.&nbsp; Following that, an aggrieved party has a
widow of opportunity within 3 more months to appeal.&nbsp; However, that right could only be exercised
if the court of fir</main>