Mensah and Others Vrs Boakye [2021] GHASC 75 (20 May 2021)

Mensah and Others Vrs Boakye [2021] GHASC 75 (20 May 2021)

The adoption of terms of settlement by a single justice did not involve a decision in the cause or matter as the dispute had already been settled and replaced by the agreement; therefore, the single justice acted within jurisdiction under Article 134(b) of the 1992 Constitution.

Citation
[2021] GHASC 75
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent: Most Rev. Dr. Robert Aboagye Mensah; Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent: Most Rev. Dr. Joseph Osei Bonsu; Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent: Rt. Rev. Daniel Yinkah-Sarfo; Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent: Edward Osei Boakye Trust Fund; Defendant/respondent/appellant/applicant: Yaw Boakye
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
20 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Motion / Review Application
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Single Justice, Adoption of Consent Judgment, Review of Court Orders
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Jurisdiction of Single Justice Adoption of Consent Judgment Review 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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Most Rev. Dr. Robert Aboagye Mensah

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent

Most Rev. Dr. Joseph Osei Bonsu

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent

Rt. Rev. Daniel Yinkah-Sarfo

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent

Edward Osei Boakye Trust Fund

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent

Yaw Boakye

Defendant/respondent/appellant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Motion / Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a single justice of the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to adopt terms of settlement as consent judgment under Article 134(b) of the 1992 Constitution
  2. 2 Whether the adoption of terms of settlement involved a decision in the cause or matter before the Supreme Court

Ratio Decidendi

The adoption of terms of settlement by a single justice did not involve a decision in the cause or matter as the dispute had already been settled and replaced by the agreement; therefore, the single justice acted within jurisdiction under Article 134(b) of the 1992 Constitution.

Court Disposition

application dismissed