Abankro and Others Vrs Ansah [2016] GHASC 74 (9 March 2016)

Abankro and Others Vrs Ansah [2016] GHASC 74 (9 March 2016)

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to rebut the registrar's affidavit, the application for extension of time was filed out of time and at the wrong forum, and the interpretation of 'proper officer' includes any officer performing registrar functions. The statutory time limits are mandatory and cannot be extended beyond two months.

Citation
[2016] GHASC 74
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Nana Nifa Abankro (Krontihene); Plaintiff/respondent: Nana Yarfi Ababio (Gyasehene); Plaintiff/respondent: Nana Boadu Semerika (Nifahene); Plaintiff/respondent: Nana Appia Nuama (Twafohene); Plaintiff/respondent: Nana Kwaku Ntrama (Kyidomhene); Defendant/appellant: Nana Boakye Ansah (Abedwimhene)
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
9 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Chieftaincy Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals, Proper Officer Interpretation
Source Language
English
Chieftaincy Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals Proper Officer Interpretation

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nana Nifa Abankro (Krontihene)

Plaintiff/respondent

Nana Yarfi Ababio (Gyasehene)

Plaintiff/respondent

Nana Boadu Semerika (Nifahene)

Plaintiff/respondent

Nana Appia Nuama (Twafohene)

Plaintiff/respondent

Nana Kwaku Ntrama (Kyidomhene)

Plaintiff/respondent

Nana Boakye Ansah (Abedwimhene)

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Chieftaincy Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was prevented from filing an appeal within time due to absence or refusal of registry staff to accept documents
  2. 2 Whether the application for extension of time was properly filed and within the statutory period
  3. 3 Interpretation of 'proper officer' under Rule 13(1) and Rule 30 of CI 27

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to rebut the registrar's affidavit, the application for extension of time was filed out of time and at the wrong forum, and the interpretation of 'proper officer' includes any officer performing registrar functions. The statutory time limits are mandatory and cannot be extended beyond two months.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with no order as to costs