Frank Honey Twum Vrs Cynthia Ofori Appiah [2022] GHACC 110 (11 November 2022)

Frank Honey Twum Vrs Cynthia Ofori Appiah [2022] GHACC 110 (11 November 2022)

The applicant was previously represented and counsel conducted rigorous cross-examination on four occasions. Change of counsel is not sufficient basis for recall unless interests of justice demand. In this case, recalling the petitioner/respondent would not serve justice but would cause undue delay and inconvenience.

Citation
[2022] GHACC 110
Parties
Petitioner/respondent: Frank Honey Twum; Respondent/applicant: Cynthia Ofori Appiah
Court
Circuit Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
11 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Motion / Ruling on Application to Recall Witness for Further Cross Examination
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Recall of Witness, Cross Examination, Change of Counsel, Exercise of Judicial Discretion
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Recall of Witness Cross Examination Change of Counsel Exercise of Judicial Discretion

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Frank Honey Twum

Petitioner/respondent

Cynthia Ofori Appiah

Respondent/applicant

Procedural Posture

Motion / Ruling on Application to Recall Witness for Further Cross Examination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petitioner/respondent should be recalled for further cross-examination due to change of counsel and alleged omissions in prior cross-examination

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was previously represented and counsel conducted rigorous cross-examination on four occasions. Change of counsel is not sufficient basis for recall unless interests of justice demand. In this case, recalling the petitioner/respondent would not serve justice but would cause undue delay and inconvenience.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • application to recall the petitioner for further cross-examination is dismissed