Ndk Financial Services Vrs Ahaman Enterprises Ltd and Others [2016] GHASC 65 (13 June 2016)

Ndk Financial Services Vrs Ahaman Enterprises Ltd and Others [2016] GHASC 65 (13 June 2016)

The Supreme Court held that its clarificatory order was a 'decision' subject to review, and that exceptional circumstances existed because the ordinary bench failed to apply the correct statutory provisions (CI 52) on post-judgment interest, resulting in a miscarriage of justice. The order on computation of interest was therefore reviewed and corrected to comply with CI 52.

Citation
[2016] GHASC 65
Parties
Plaintiff/applicant: NDK Financial Services; 1st Defendant/respondent: Ahaman Enterprises Limited; 2nd Defendant/respondent: Attorney-General; 3rd Defendant/respondent: Alex A. Aduko
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
13 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Review Motion / Ruling on Application for Review of Clarificatory Decision
Outcome
application for review allowed in part
Legal Topics
Review of Court Decisions, Award of Interest, Post Judgment Interest, Clarification of Judgments, Res Judicata
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Contract Law Review of Court Decisions Award of Interest Post Judgment Interest Clarification of Judgments Res Judicata

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

Parties

NDK Financial Services

Plaintiff/applicant

Ahaman Enterprises Limited

1st Defendant/respondent

Attorney-General

2nd Defendant/respondent

Alex A. Aduko

3rd Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Motion / Ruling on Application for Review of Clarificatory Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court's clarificatory order on computation of post-judgment interest was per incuriam for failing to apply the correct statutory provisions
  2. 2 Whether the clarificatory order constituted a 'decision' amenable to review under Rule 54 of CI 16
  3. 3 Whether the matter was res judicata

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that its clarificatory order was a 'decision' subject to review, and that exceptional circumstances existed because the ordinary bench failed to apply the correct statutory provisions (CI 52) on post-judgment interest, resulting in a miscarriage of justice. The order on computation of interest was therefore reviewed and corrected to comply with CI 52.

Court Disposition

application for review allowed in part

Orders

  • The computation of post-judgment interest is to be governed by CI 52, with interest running at the statutory rate from the date of judgment to the date of final payment.