Agyarkwa Vrs Folagin & 4 Ors [2020] GHASC 103 (11 March 2020)

Agyarkwa Vrs Folagin & 4 Ors [2020] GHASC 103 (11 March 2020)

The High Court lacked jurisdiction to set aside its judgment more than one year after judgment and after execution had ended; the application was out of time and all subsequent proceedings are null and void. The proper procedure for an aggrieved party is to institute a fresh action.

Citation
Agyarkwa Vrs Folagin & 4 Ors [2020] GHASC 103 (11 March 2020)
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/cross Appellant: Opanin E. K. Agyarkwa (substituted by Opanin Yaw Asare, suing as head and lawful representative of Tete Pa Ogya Agona Family of Adamorobe, near Aburi); 1st Defendant/respondent/appellant: James Folagin; 2nd Defendant/respondent/appellant: Esther Folagin; 3rd Defendant/respondent/appellant: William Folagin; 4th Defendant/respondent: Madam Abena Kumah; 5th Defendant/respondent: Bortefio Mensah
Court
ghasc
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
11 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order setting aside judgment and all subsequent proceedings declared null and void; original High Court judgment and orders restored.
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Judgments, Execution of Judgments, Functus Officio, Natural Justice, Default Judgment, Time Limits for Applications
Source Language
eng
Civil Procedure Land Law Setting Aside Judgments Execution of Judgments Functus Officio Natural Justice Default Judgment Time Limits for Applications

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Opanin E. K. Agyarkwa (substituted by Opanin Yaw Asare, suing as head and lawful representative of Tete Pa Ogya Agona Family of Adamorobe, near Aburi)

Plaintiff/appellant/cross Appellant

James Folagin

1st Defendant/respondent/appellant

Esther Folagin

2nd Defendant/respondent/appellant

William Folagin

3rd Defendant/respondent/appellant

Madam Abena Kumah

4th Defendant/respondent

Bortefio Mensah

5th Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court could lawfully set aside its judgment more than one year after judgment and after execution had ended in the same case
  2. 2 Whether subsequent proceedings after execution are valid

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court lacked jurisdiction to set aside its judgment more than one year after judgment and after execution had ended; the application was out of time and all subsequent proceedings are null and void. The proper procedure for an aggrieved party is to institute a fresh action.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order setting aside judgment and all subsequent proceedings declared null and void; original High Court judgment and orders restored.

Orders

  • Set aside the order of the High Court dated 22nd July 2011 which purported to set aside the judgment of 8th June 2010 and all subsequent proceedings.
  • Restore the judgment and orders of the first trial High Court dated 8th June 2010 and all processes and actions taken pursuant thereto.