Home Local News NEWS FLASH |Supreme Court Also Dismisses Assin North MP’s Review Application

NEWS FLASH |Supreme Court Also Dismisses Assin North MP’s Review Application[READ]

129
0

The Supreme Court has dismissed a review application filed by Member of Parliament for Assin North James Gyakye Quayson challenging the apex court’s decision for him to file his response to an interlocutory injunction.

The panel of nine chaired by Justice Jones Victor Dotse in their unanimous ruling said the review application lacks merit and accordingly dismissed it.

VIRAL |Akufo-Addo YET-AGAIN Blows $460k On Private Jet For His USA Trip[READ]

According to Court Correspondent Murtala Inusah, as sighted by wildLEAKx, this decision of the court has paved the way for the hearing of the substantive interlocutory injunction seeking to stop him from performing his parliamentary duties.

Meanwhile, the application for Stay of Proceedings pending the determination of the appeal has been withdrawn by the applicant as Moot and was subsequently struck out.

The full reasoning of the Justices according to Justice Dotse, the president of the panel would be made ready on or before Friday, April 8, 2022.

Lawyers of the MP led by Tsatsu Tsikata had moved a review application after the seven member panel of the apex court had said he was duly notified of the pendency of the case.

On March 16, the hearing of the injunction filed by Michael Ankomah Nimfah, a private citizen against the Assin North MP from performing his parliamentary duties was blocked with two motions – a Review application against the court’s ruling on March 8 and a Stay of Proceedings.

On March 29, while moving the motion for the nine member enhanced panel to review the apex court’s earlier decision, Lawyer for the Applicant Tsatsu Tsikata said, the Supreme Court not complying with its own orders renders their sitting on March 16, a “nullity and void.”

He argued that, the order of substituted service in the Daily Graphic on March 1, was not in conformity to what the court’s order was.


NEWS FLASH |Bawumia Inaugurates Another 12 Joint Venture Companies[READ]

“My Lords, not only with the non compliance but there was an insertion made which were different in material…against what was ordered by the court,” Mr Tsikata argued.

Response

Frank Davies, counsel for the respondent on his part said, they are of the considered view that no exceptional circumstance has been adduced to show that there was a miscarriage of Justice.

He said, there was nothing wrong with the order of the court and that the applicant has been duly served.

EXCLUSIVE |Why Anas Is Trending On Twitter Today[WATCH]

The Review panel presided over by Justice Jones Victor Dotse with Justice Agnes Dordzie, Justice Nene Amegatcher, Justice Prof Nii AshieKotey, Justice Mariama Owusu, Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, Justice Clemence Honyenuga, Justice Prof. Henrrietta Mensah-Bonsu and Justice Yonni Kulendi as other members adjourned the case to April 5 for ruling.

Background

The Supreme Court had on March 8, 2022, ordered the legislator to file his defence in the case after in a 6-1 ruling.

The apex court had held that, the MP has been sufficiently given notice of the case against him.

It was the contention of Mr Tsikata that, the seven days period given by the court for the Daily Graphic’s publication as per the orders in a substituted had not elapsed.

The Supreme Court said, the postings of the proceses in his house and notice boards of High Court and Supreme are enough to bring the matter to the attention of the MP regardless of the publication in the Graphic.

Orders

TRENDING |Ghana’s Economy Is Terrible |Video Of BBC’s Peter Okwoche Sparking Fire On Akufo-Addo Face-2-Face In His Recent USA Trip TRENDS Online |But Prez Says Every Country Is Struggling[WATCH]

The panel on February 22, directed that court processes be brought to the attention of the MP through a publication in the Daily Graphic newspaper and posting on the wall of the Supreme Court in Accra, the High Court in Cape Coast and the residence of the MP.

This was after the plaintiff through his lawyers filed the case against the MP, told the court all attempts to give the MP court documents have proved unsuccessful.

After hearing the parties, the court said, “We agree to adjourned to 29 and hear the review motion panel to be constituted by the CJ and depending on the outcome, the substantive interlocutory injunction will be heard.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here