ANKOMAH-NIMFAH VRS. QUAYSON AND OTHERS (J1/11/2022) [2022] GHASC 126 (13 April 2022)

ANKOMAH-NIMFAH VRS. QUAYSON AND OTHERS (J1/11/2022) [2022] GHASC 126 (13 April 2022)

The majority held that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to grant an interlocutory injunction pending the determination of the substantive suit, even in the absence of express procedural rules, and that the applicant had established a prima facie case of continuing constitutional violation. The balance of convenience and public interest warranted the grant of the injunction to restrain the 1st Respondent from acting as Member of Parliament for Assin North Constituency until the final determination of the suit.

Citation
[2022] GHASC 126
Parties
Plaintiff/applicant: Michael Ankomah-Nimfah; 1st Defendant/respondent: James Gyakye Quayson; 2nd Defendant/respondent: The Electoral Commission; 3rd Defendant/respondent: The Attorney-General
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
13 April 2022
Case Number
J1/11/2022
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Pending Determination of Substantive Suit
Outcome
Application for interlocutory injunction granted (majority); dissenting opinions dismissing application.
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Parliamentary Elections, Qualification of Members of Parliament, Jurisdiction of Supreme Court, Enforcement of Court Orders
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Electoral Law Civil Procedure Interlocutory Injunctions Parliamentary Elections Qualification of Members of Parliament Jurisdiction of Supreme Court Enforcement of Court Orders

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 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Ankomah-Nimfah

Plaintiff/applicant

James Gyakye Quayson

1st Defendant/respondent

The Electoral Commission

2nd Defendant/respondent

The Attorney-General

3rd Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Pending Determination of Substantive Suit

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to grant an interlocutory injunction in the absence of express procedural rules
  2. 2 Whether the application for interlocutory injunction is competent
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has established grounds for the grant of interlocutory injunction restraining the 1st Respondent from acting as Member of Parliament

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to grant an interlocutory injunction pending the determination of the substantive suit, even in the absence of express procedural rules, and that the applicant had established a prima facie case of continuing constitutional violation. The balance of convenience and public interest warranted the grant of the injunction to restrain the 1st Respondent from acting as Member of Parliament for Assin North Constituency until the final determination of the suit.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunction granted (majority); dissenting opinions dismissing application.

Orders

  • 1st Respondent restrained from holding himself out as Member of Parliament for Assin North Constituency, presenting himself, and/or attending Parliament to conduct the business of a Member of Parliament pending determination of the suit.
  • Parties to file joint or separate memorandum of issues by 25th April 2022.