Kwame and Another Vrs Banful and Others [2004] GHACA 16 (17 December 2004)

Kwame and Another Vrs Banful and Others [2004] GHACA 16 (17 December 2004)

The High Court's ruling of 19-6-02 was a nullity because it was made on a motion that had already been struck out and thus did not exist before the court.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2004] GHACA 16
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: E. B. Timothy Kwame Botchey & Another; Defendant/respondent: Joseph Banful & 5 Others
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
17 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Ruling
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Capacity to Sue, Striking Out Proceedings, Nullity of Proceedings
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Capacity to Sue Striking Out Proceedings Nullity of Proceedings

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

E. B. Timothy Kwame Botchey & Another

Plaintiff/appellant

Joseph Banful & 5 Others

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in striking out the Plaintiffs' writ of summons for lack of capacity and cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to rule on a motion that had already been struck out

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court's ruling of 19-6-02 was a nullity because it was made on a motion that had already been struck out and thus did not exist before the court.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The High Court ruling of 19-6-02 is set aside as null and void.
  • Costs of ¢3 million awarded to Plaintiffs/Appellants.