Ofori Vrs Ecobank Ghana Limited & 2 Ors [2021] GHASC 134 (13 July 2021)

Ofori Vrs Ecobank Ghana Limited & 2 Ors [2021] GHASC 134 (13 July 2021)

The majority held that the application was misconceived and an abuse of process because the Supreme Court's rules already provide for review and adducing new evidence, which the applicant had previously invoked and exhausted; the alleged new evidence was not relevant to the issues determined in the appeal, and the conduct of the plaintiff in receiving dividends was lawful under the binding judgments at the time. The inherent jurisdiction of the court could not be invoked to circumvent express procedural rules or to re-litigate matters already settled.

Citation
[2021] GHASC 134
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/appellant/respondent: Daniel Ofori; 1st Defendant/respondent/respondent/applicant: Ecobank Ghana Limited; 4th Defendant: Securities and Exchange Commission; 5th Defendant: Ghana Stock Exchange
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
13 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Motion / Application to Re Open Concluded Supreme Court Appeal and Adduce Further Evidence
Outcome
Application dismissed (majority); Dissent would have allowed application and re-opened appeal.
Legal Topics
Inherent Jurisdiction, Finality of Judgments, Fresh Evidence on Appeal, Abuse of Process, Dividends and Share Ownership, Fraud on the Court
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Securities Law Inherent Jurisdiction Finality of Judgments Fresh Evidence on Appeal Abuse of Process Dividends and Share Ownership +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Ofori

Plaintiff/appellant/appellant/respondent

Ecobank Ghana Limited

1st Defendant/respondent/respondent/applicant

Securities and Exchange Commission

4th Defendant

Ghana Stock Exchange

5th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Motion / Application to Re Open Concluded Supreme Court Appeal and Adduce Further Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court can re-open a concluded appeal and allow further evidence under its inherent jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's alleged new evidence justifies re-opening the appeal
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the plaintiff in receiving dividends post-judgment constitutes unfair procedure or fraud

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that the application was misconceived and an abuse of process because the Supreme Court's rules already provide for review and adducing new evidence, which the applicant had previously invoked and exhausted; the alleged new evidence was not relevant to the issues determined in the appeal, and the conduct of the plaintiff in receiving dividends was lawful under the binding judgments at the time. The inherent jurisdiction of the court could not be invoked to circumvent express procedural rules or to re-litigate matters already settled.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed (majority); Dissent would have allowed application and re-opened appeal.

Orders

  • Application to re-open appeal and adduce further evidence is dismissed as an abuse of process.