Adu Kofi V. Chief Kwesi Brentuo For And On Behalf Of The Stool Of Adokwai (1944)
LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in Ashanti—Courts Ordinance, s. 14, s. 17 (b) ; Native courts (Ashanti) Ordinance (Cap. 80) s. 35—Practice—Supreme Court Rules, o. 34, R. 5—Reviewed” Ex parte ” judgment.
Facts
Plaintiff sued for £114 as cocoa tribute due by Defendant for farming on Stool land under an oral agreement, and obtained judgment by default (described as ” ex parte “) in the Divisional Court of the Supreme Court. Defendant applied for review of the judgment but as the Judge went on leave, he dropped that application and asked for leave to appeal. On appeal it was argued for him that that Court had no jurisdiction, there being a competent Native Court (to which the parties should have been referred) with jurisdiction in suits ” relating to the ownership, possession or occupation of land “, the present suit being of that nature. The Plaintiff-Respondent’s reply was that it did not ” appear to the Divisional Court ” that the suit was one properly cognisable by a Native Court.
Held
Held that the Supreme Court will decline to entertain a suit only where some issue of tact or law is raised for the Court’s decision as to the ownership, possession or occupation of land, and that it is to the issues to be tried that one must look and not merely the wording of the writ.
Held also that where the Court is given general jurisdiction subject to a. direction not to exercise it where it appears that are certain facts existing in the suit, a party omitting to bring them to the notice of the Court cannot complain if the Court comes to a conclusion without reference, to such facts
Obikr : (1) Only the Judge who gave the judgment can be asked tc review it.
- Where judgment is given by default, the proper applicatioc is under 0.34, R.5, of the Supreme Court Rules, which may be made ncr.. only to the Judge who gave the judgment but also to the Court.
- It is incorrect to describe a judgment as ex parte where thy.. Defendant had been given notice.
For these reasons the appeal is dismissed with costs assessed at £24 16s.
