LIVING FAITH WORLD OUTREACH CENTRE & 2 ORS vs. THE REGISTRAR-GENERAL & 14 ORS [2023]DLSC15158

Date	2023-05-17
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/49/2021
Citation No.	[2023]DLSC15158

PWAMANG JSC (PRESIDING)

OWUSU (MS.) JSC

LOVELACE-JOHNSON (MS.) JSC

PROF. MENSA-BONSU (MRS.) JSC

ASIEDU JSC

HADDEUS SORY ESQ. FOR PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS

A.A. SOMUAH-ASAMOAH ESQ. FOR DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS/ APPELLANTS

YEHODA K. KOTEY ESQ. FOR 9TH DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT

[2023]DLSC15158
																																						<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" >LIVING FAITH WORLD
OUTREACH CENTRE &amp; 2 ORS<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE REGISTRAR-GENERAL
&amp; 14 ORS<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0in 0in 1pt;">

CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/49/2021&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 MAY 2023<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<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: 0in 0in 1pt;">

THADDEUS
SORY ESQ. FOR PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS<o:p></o:p>

A.A.
SOMUAH-ASAMOAH ESQ. FOR DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS/<o:p></o:p>

YEHODA
K. KOTEY ESQ. FOR 9TH DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>PWAMANG JSC
(PRESIDING), OWUSU (MS.) JSC, LOVELACE-JOHNSON (MS.) JSC, PROF. MENSA-BONSU
(MRS.) JSC, ASIEDU JSC<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 0in;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;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:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>ASIEDU JSC:-<o:p></o:p>INTRODUCTION:<o:p></o:p>(1)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;
. This appeal emanates from a judgment delivered
by the Court of Appeal on the 30th November 2020. In the said
judgment, the Court of Appeal set aside a judgment delivered by the High Court
in favour of the Defendants therein on the 28th July 2017. The
judgment of the High Court was in respect of two suits that were consolidated,
heard together and on which one composite judgment was delivered by the High
Court in respect of the consolidated suits. The Court of Appeal, like the High
Court, also delivered one composite judgment on the consolidated suits. By the
established practice of the Courts, where there is a consolidation of suits,
the consolidation is only for the purpose of the adduction of evidence but when
it comes to judgment, the court is required to deliver separate judgments using
the evidence adduced. However, in this case, the fact that a composite judgment
was delivered by the Court of Appeal, is not a subject of the appeal against
the judgment of the Court of Appeal. In the circumstances, we will deal with
all the relevant issues and grounds of appeal in one composite judgment with
due regard to the respective but relevant issues raised before the trial High
Court in each of the suits consolidated and heard together. In this regard, the
Plaintiffs/Appellants/Respondents will retain their designation before the
trial High Court as the Plaintiffs whiles the
Defendants/Respondents/Appellants, with the exception of the 9th
Defendant/Appellant/Respondent, maintain their designation as Defendants before
the trial High Court. In view of their peculiar circumstances and, considering
the fact that the 9th Defendant shares the same position with
respect to the relevant issues herein, the 9th Defendant will, in
this judgment, be subsumed under and as part of the Plaintiffs herein.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(2)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp; RELIEFS &amp; GROUNDS OF APPEAL:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The Defendants
seek essentially two reliefs from this court in respect of their appeal as
follows: (i) That the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Accra dated 30th
November 2020 allowing the appeal by the Plaintiffs/Appellants/Respondents, the
Consequential orders made and the Costs awarded be set aside. (ii)That an order
be made restoring the judgment of the trial High Court in favour of the
Defendants/Respondents/Appellants. These reliefs sought by the Defendants are
premised on six grounds of appeal which the Defendants have stated in their
notice of appeal as follows: <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;
text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:115%;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2">(a)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp; The
judgment of the Court of Appeal is against the weight of evidence<o:p></o:p>