G. VALENTINE FELIX & Anor V. H. C. BANKOLE-BRIGHT (1930)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

Practice—Application for leave to appeal to Privy Council—Amount of judgment debt below appealable limit costs.

Where a n appeal does not lie for mattes* in dispute below a certain value, the costs awarded cannot be reckolixl as part of the amount of the judgment.

E. S. Beoku-Betts for the Defendant-Afipellant. H.j. L. Boston for the Plaintiffs-Respondents.

The following judgment was delivered :—

YOUNG, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE OF SIERRA LEONE.

This is an application for conditional leave to appeal under Rule 3 (a) and (b) of the West African (Appeal to Privy Council) Order in Council, 1930, from a judgment of the West African Court of Appeal to the Privy Council. =In the Court of Appeal judgment was entered for the Plaintiffs-Respondents for £491 5s. 6d. which included interest. It is now contended by Counsel for the Appellant that the costs should be included for the purpose of bringing the appealable amount over 000. It has been laid down in many cases that where an appeal does not lie for matters below a’certain value the costs of the suit cannot be taken in as forming put of the amount in controversy, cf. Doorga Chowdry v. Ramanaidh Chowdry 8 Moo. 3rd app. 262, and Great Western Ry. of Canada v. Braid, 1 Moo. P.C. (N.S.) 101.

This application is on all fours with the above quoted cases, and the learned Counsel for the Appellant had no argument to offer against them.

I have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion, without calling on counsel for the Respondents, that this application must be dismissed with costs.