Zoomlion Ghana Ltd Vrs Merskworld Co Ltd [2014] GHASC 132 (6 February 2014)

Zoomlion Ghana Ltd Vrs Merskworld Co Ltd [2014] GHASC 132 (6 February 2014)

The Supreme Court held that the single justice erred by granting an interim injunction based on an issue (non-service of hearing notice) that was not part of the substantive appeal and had not been raised in the lower courts. This constituted a fundamental error resulting in a miscarriage of justice, warranting the exercise of review jurisdiction under Article 134(b).

Citation
[2014] GHASC 132
Parties
Applicant/respondent: Zoomlion Ghana Ltd; Respondent/applicant: Merskworld Co. Ltd
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
6 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Review Motion / Ruling on Application to Reverse Decision of Single Justice Under Article 134(b) of the 1992 Constitution
Outcome
Application allowed; ruling of the single judge set aside.
Legal Topics
Review of Judicial Decisions, Jurisdiction of Supreme Court, Stay of Execution, Service of Hearing Notice, Natural Justice
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Company Law Review of Judicial Decisions Jurisdiction of Supreme Court Stay of Execution Service of Hearing Notice Natural Justice

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

Parties

Zoomlion Ghana Ltd

Applicant/respondent

Merskworld Co. Ltd

Respondent/applicant

Procedural Posture

Review Motion / Ruling on Application to Reverse Decision of Single Justice Under Article 134(b) of the 1992 Constitution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction under Article 134(b) to review a decision of a single justice
  2. 2 Whether the single justice erred by granting an interim injunction based on alleged non-service of hearing notice under section 263(1) of the Companies Act
  3. 3 Whether the issue of non-service was properly before the court

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the single justice erred by granting an interim injunction based on an issue (non-service of hearing notice) that was not part of the substantive appeal and had not been raised in the lower courts. This constituted a fundamental error resulting in a miscarriage of justice, warranting the exercise of review jurisdiction under Article 134(b).

Court Disposition

Application allowed; ruling of the single judge set aside.

Orders

  • The ruling of the single judge dated 7th November 2013 is set aside.