Aboagye-mensah & 3 Ors Vrs Boakye [2022] GHASC 77 (16 March 2022)

Aboagye-mensah & 3 Ors Vrs Boakye [2022] GHASC 77 (16 March 2022)

The application was dismissed because it was filed after an unreasonable delay of seven years, constituted an abuse of process due to prior similar applications, and lacked merit as the record of appeal had been transmitted and the single Justice had jurisdiction to adopt the consent judgment.

Citation
[2022] GHASC 77
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/respondent: Most Rev. Dr. Robert Aboagye-Mensah; Plaintiff/appellant/respondent: Most Rev. Dr. Joseph Osei Bonsu; Plaintiff/appellant/respondent: Rtd. Rev. Daniel Yinka-Sarfo; Plaintiff/appellant/respondent: Edward Osei Boakye Trust Fund; Defendant/respondent/appellant/applicant: Yaw Boakye
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
16 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Motion / Ruling on Application to Discharge or Reverse Order of Single Justice
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Review of Single Justice Decision, Consent Judgment, Abuse of Process, Limitation of Actions, Execution of Judgments
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Review of Single Justice Decision Consent Judgment Abuse of Process Limitation of Actions Execution of Judgments

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Most Rev. Dr. Robert Aboagye-Mensah

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent

Most Rev. Dr. Joseph Osei Bonsu

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent

Rtd. Rev. Daniel Yinka-Sarfo

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent

Edward Osei Boakye Trust Fund

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent

Yaw Boakye

Defendant/respondent/appellant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Motion / Ruling on Application to Discharge or Reverse Order of Single Justice

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application to discharge or reverse the order of a single Justice is competent after a significant delay
  2. 2 Whether multiple applications for review on similar grounds constitute abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to adopt the consent judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because it was filed after an unreasonable delay of seven years, constituted an abuse of process due to prior similar applications, and lacked merit as the record of appeal had been transmitted and the single Justice had jurisdiction to adopt the consent judgment.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Applicant restrained from filing further processes to frustrate execution of the consent judgment without leave of the Court.
  • Respondent granted leave to proceed with execution of the consent judgment as per orders for garnishee and recovery of possession.