Tamakloe Vrs Registered Trustees Of The Methodist Church [2004] GHACA 35 (23 July 2004)

Tamakloe Vrs Registered Trustees Of The Methodist Church [2004] GHACA 35 (23 July 2004)

The transaction on 3rd June 2002 was not a consent judgment as the legal requirements for such were not met; however, the solicitor's submission to judgment on behalf of the defendants fell within the scope of his general authority, making the judgment binding. The trial judge erred in setting aside the judgment.

Citation
[2004] GHACA 35
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Kwaku Tamakloe; Defendant/respondent: The Registered Trustees of the Methodist Church; Defendant/respondent: Rev. Dr. Emmanuel K. Marfo; Defendant/respondent: Rev. Dr. Samuel Asante-Antwi
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
23 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Ruling on Setting Aside Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court ruling set aside.
Legal Topics
Consent Judgment, Authority of Counsel, Setting Aside Judgment, Default Judgment
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Consent Judgment Authority of Counsel Setting Aside Judgment Default Judgment

Case Brief

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kwaku Tamakloe

Plaintiff/appellant

The Registered Trustees of the Methodist Church

Defendant/respondent

Rev. Dr. Emmanuel K. Marfo

Defendant/respondent

Rev. Dr. Samuel Asante-Antwi

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Ruling on Setting Aside Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in setting aside a judgment described as a consent judgment
  2. 2 Whether the solicitor for the defendants had authority to submit to judgment on behalf of the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The transaction on 3rd June 2002 was not a consent judgment as the legal requirements for such were not met; however, the solicitor's submission to judgment on behalf of the defendants fell within the scope of his general authority, making the judgment binding. The trial judge erred in setting aside the judgment.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court ruling set aside.

Orders

  • Ruling delivered on 19th March 2003 is set aside.