[2022]DLSC11161 Login to Read Full Case <span style="font-size: 18px !important;"><span style="font-size: 18px !important;"><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; color:#00B0F0;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; color:#00B0F0;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">vs.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; color:#00B0F0;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">HIGH COURT (CRIMINAL DIVISION 9), ACCRA<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center"><i><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; color:#00B0F0;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">EXPARTE: ECOBANK GHANA LIMITED<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center"><i><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">(APPLICANT)<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; color:#00B0F0;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">ORIGIN 8 LIMITED AND GREATER ACCRA PASSENGER TRANSPORT EXECUTIVE<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center"><i><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">(INTERESTED PARTIES/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family: "Book Antiqua",serif;color:#111616;mso-font-width:105%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">[</span><span lang="en-GH" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; color:#111616;mso-font-width:105%">SUPREME<span style="letter-spacing:-.3pt"> </span>COURT</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; color:#111616;mso-font-width:105%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p></span></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;"> <p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><span style="font-size:10.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">CIVIL MOTION NO. J5/10/2022 DATE: 18TH JANUARY, 2022<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">COUNSEL<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">KERVIN TETTEY ASHONG ESQ. LED BY JUSTICE KUSI-MINKAH PREMO ESQ. FOR THE APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p></span></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;"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm; mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">ANDREW NII ADJEI KHARTEY FOR THE 1ST INTERESTED PARTY.<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">CORAM: <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">YEBOAH CJ (PRESIDING), PWAMANG JSC, OWUSU (MS.) JSC, HONYENUGAJSC AMADU JSC<o:p></o:p></span></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="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center;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"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">RULING<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">PWAMANG JSC:-<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">My Lords, on the 18th January, 2022, we unanimously granted the prayers of the applicant in this motion but reserved the reasons. We now proceed to give our reasons for the decision. This is an app, jurisdiction over the<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">High Court (Commercial Division 9), Accra, in relation to its ruling declining jurisdiction in a motion praying for the suspension of a garnishee order absolute and stay of garnishee proceedings pending appeal.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">There is pending before the High Court proceedings of execution of its judgment for payment of money. Following the grant of garnishee orders nisi against two banks, the court made an order absolute against the applicant alone for payment of the whole of the judgment debt to the judgment creditor/interested party. Being aggrieved by the order, the applicant lodged an appeal against it in the Court of Appeal. After initially applying to the Court of Appeal for stay of execution of the order pending the appeal and meeting a refusal, the applicant returned to the High Court and prayed it to suspend the order and stay the proceedings of execution pending the determination of the appeal under its inherent jurisdiction. But counsel for the judgment creditor took objection to the hearing of the application by the High Court arguing, that the power of the High Court to stay execution of its judgment or order that has been appealed against has been taken away by the Court of Appeal (Amendment) Rules, 2020 (C.I.132). In her ruling dated 3rd November, 2021, the judge upheld the objection and did not hear the application on the merits but dismissed it as incompetent. It is that decision that the applicant prays us to quash by an order of certiorari on ground of blatant error of law apparent on the record and further, for order of mandamus compelling the trial judge to hear and determine the application on the merits.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">In these present proceedings, the Counsel for the applicant, Mr J Kusi-Menkah Premo, argues that the High Court judge committed a blatant error of law by holding that she has no jurisdiction in the matter. He submits that a court has inherent jurisdiction to stay execution or proceedings of execution of its judgment or order even if the judgment or order has been appealed against. This power, he contends, exists in the court so long as execution has not been completed and it is inherent in the court. According to him, since the court's order absolute for the garnishee to pay the money had not yet been carried out, the matter was pending before the court notwithstanding the appeal lodged in the Court of Appeal so the High Court had jurisdiction to entertain the application for stay. In answer to the contention that C.I.132 has taken away that power of the High Court, he says that the said instrument did not take away the inherent power of the High Court as the power is innate in the court and not dependent on the rules of court. Relying on Ahyia v Amoah [1987-88] 2 GLR 289, he submits that until the record of the appeal has been transmitted to the Court of Appeal, the court below has power to hear interlocutory applications in the case. He states that, in any event, where it is in the interest of justice, inherent power can be exercised by a court notwithstanding that a rule of court regulates the circumstances that necessitate its exercise. Counsel has referred copiously to the concurring opinion of our distinguished brother, Anin Yeboah, JSC (as he then was) in the case of Footprints Solutions Ltd v Leo & Lee Company Ltd, CA. No 14/52/2011 unreported judgment delivered on 24th May, 2013. In that case, our noble and honourable brother made reference to the scope of inherent jurisdiction of a court after it has given judgment as explained in Acheampong v Asare-Manu [1976] 1 GLR 28 at 29where it was said that;<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify"><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">"...one of such areas where the court's inherent powers can be invoked is where necessary to prevent injury being inflicted by its own Judgment .."<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Counsel has also quoted and relied on the following statement by Benin, JSC in <b>Republic Vrs High Court, Accra; Ex Parte: Magna International Transport Ltd ( Ghana Telecommunications Co Ltd-Interested Party) [2017-2018] 2 SCLRG (Adaare) 1024 at 1