The Supreme Court has quashed a decision of a High Court that granted Numoe Nmashie Family of Teshie, Accra, the power to retake lands belonging to a private individual.
The highest court said the High Court’s judgement which the Numoe Nmashie Family was relying on to take lands belonging to Kwadwo Asante Boateng aka Kwadwo Baah is null and void.
“Let the judgement of the High Court dated 3rd November, 2016 in suit number HR0111/2016, Numo Nmashie Family of Teshie etc vrs Land Commission be brought before this court for the purposes of being quashed, on an Order of Certiorari and the same is hereby quashed,” the five-member panel presided over by incoming Chief Justice Sophia Akuffo held recently.
The Numo Nmashie Family initiated the action against the Lands Commission seeking an order for the commission to register all applications submitted by the family in respect of large tracts of lands in Accra including Mr. Boateng’s by insisting that the commission had breached the Fundamental Human Rights of the family.
The High Court on November 3, 2016, granted the Order of Certiorari for the Numo Nmashie Family who in turn tried to enforce the court’s order.
However, affected by the High Court’s decision, Kwadwo Baah filed an ex-parte application at the Supreme Court with the High Court as the respondent and Numoe Nmashie Family and the Land Commission as the 1st and 2nd respondents respectively.
In his grounds for the application, Kwadwo Baah had argued that the judgement of the High Court was rendered in breach of what he called “ausi alteram partem rule” insisting that he was neither a party to the suit or was he heard in the matter.
In the Supreme Court’s view, the decision of the High Court “affects his (Kwadwo Baah) peaceful occupation of a piece of land in which he has an interest.”
The court held that the applicant was able to refer “to the provisions of the Rules of Court and also to Ex-parte: Tsatsu Tsikata,” and added that “there is no error on the face of the record.”
“The judgement rendered by the High Court Judge on 3rd November 2016 in the matter before was a judgement in default of appearance. It is clear on the face of the record before us that most of the claims by the plaintiff before the court were all matters that required proof,” adding “however, they were all granted, even though the judge did not try any of those claims on evidence.”
The Supreme Court added: “This was an error of law that is apparent on the face of the record, a ground for an Order of Certiorari.”
It said “additionally, judgement adversely affected the interest of the applicant according to his affidavit herein; consequently since he ought to have been heard.”
Other justices of the panel were: Jones Dotse, Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, Sule Gbadegbe and Gabriel Pwamang.
By William Yaw Owusu