THE REPUBLIC vs. FRANCIS TACHIE MENSON EX PARTE: ERIC GBEHO [2020]DLHC9974

Date	2020-10-27
Suit No.	SUIT NO.: CR/ 0394/2020
Citation No.	[2020]DLHC9974

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE YAW DARKO ASARE

DENNIS ADJEI DWOMOH FOR RESPONDENT

CHARLES ZWENNES FOR THE APPLICANT

[2020]DLHC9974
																																						<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>FRANCIS TACHIE MENSON<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>EX PARTE: ERIC GBEHO<o:p></o:p>(APPLICANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

SUIT
NO.: CR/ 0394/2020&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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:
27TH OCTOBER, 2020<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>DENNIS ADJEI DWOMOH FOR RESPONDENT <o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

CHARLES
ZWENNES FOR THE APPLICANT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE YAW DARKO ASARE<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%;
border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;On the 13th day
of May 2020, the Applicant herein filed the instant proceedings supported by a
14 paragraphed affidavit for an order of committal for contempt against the
Respondent. <o:p></o:p>After being served with the
said application for contempt, the Respondent promptly filed a process dated
the 16th of June 2020 by which he sought an order to dismiss the
contempt proceedings herein on grounds that this Court’s jurisdiction had been
wrongly invoked by reason of incurable flaws apparent in the processes filed by
the Applicant herein. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 15pt; text-align: justify; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:
&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-bidi-font-family:Calibri;mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-latin;
color:#424242;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Upon the
matter coming up for determination, the Court directed the Parties to submit
written briefs in support of their respective cases for the consideration of
the Court. I must say that I am particularly impressed by the industry and
enterprise applied by Learned Counsel for both Parties in the preparation of
the written briefs submitted for my consideration. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 15pt; text-align: justify; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Now,
the anchor sheet of the Respondent’s preliminary objection against the
competency of Applicant’s instant application for contempt of court is not
difficult to fathom, and is essentially grounded on the main premise that the initiating
processes by which the said contempt application was commenced, specifically,
the originating notice of motion filed by the Applicant dated the 13th
day of May 2020, was incurably flawed, rendering same liable to be declared a
nullity ab initio and set aside ex debito justitiae.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>According
to the Respondent, by commencing the initiating processes, by a law firm rather
than a lawyer properly licensed to practice within the jurisdiction, the said
application fundamentally sinned against the law regulating the commencement of
proceedings in the court, and was thus fundamentally and irremediably defective.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Respondent
mainly grounded his submissions on the strength of various statutory provisions
governing the substantive and procedural rules on the commencement of legal
actions, including:-<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;i. The Legal
Profession Act, 1960 (Act 32)<o:p></o:p>ii. The Legal
Profession (professional conduct and etiquette) rules, 1969 LI 613 and<o:p></o:p>iii. The High Court
(Civil Procedure Rules) 2004, CI 47<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Remarkably,
learned Counsel for the Applicant in his Written Submissions, did not directly
dispute the fact that the motion of notice for the application for contempt was
signed by a law firm and not by any named lawyer, neither did he dispute the
fact that no solicitor’s license was stipulated on the face of the motion
paper.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;He
however contended that the default only occasioned a minor slip or irregularity
which could be cured by the provisions of Order 81 of CI 47. He cites the case
of Republic
v. High Court, Accra, Ex-parte Allgate Co. Ltd. [2007-8] SCGLR 1041,
in support of his contentions.<o:p></o:p>