LAW TIP
The issue of capacity goes to the root of a case and can be raised at any time.
QUOTE FROM JUDGMENT
“The issue of capacity is very important and can be raised at any stage of the trial and even after judgment. This position of the law has been endorsed by the court in several cases including the celebrated case of Tuffour v Attorney-General (1980) 637 C.A (sitting as the S. C).” MUSAMA DISCO CHRISTO CHURCH AND OTHERS Vrs PROPHET JEHU-APPIAH and ANOTHER (CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/31/2012 11TH NOVEMBER,2015
LAW TIP
An appellate court will not disturb a trial court’s factual findings unless there’s a clear mistake that causes injustice.
QUOTE FROM JUDGMENT
“It is settled law that where the trial Judge has made findings of facts and there is evidence in support of those findings, the appellate Court will not interfere with them. The Appellate court is not to set aside the findings of a trial court unless there is clear evidence of some blunder or error which results in miscarriage of justice.” MUSAMA DISCO CHRISTO CHURCH AND OTHERS Vrs PROPHET JEHU-APPIAH and ANOTHER ( CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/31/2012 11TH NOVEMBER,2015
LAW TIP
You do not need many witnesses to prove a case. One credible and reliable witness can be enough. MUSAMA DISCO CHRISTO CHURCH & ORS v PROPHET JEHU-APPIAH & ANOR (J4/31/2012) (11/11/2015)
QUOTE FROM JUDGEMENT
“The general rule is that, multiplicity of witnesses alone does not prove a case, and evidence of a single witness, if credible and reliable is sufficient proof of any matter in issue. This was also stated in the case of Adom v Ntow (1992-1993) 4GBR 1603 C.A and Kru v Saoud Bros (1975) 1 GLR 46. Consequently ground 1 of the appeal fails.” MUSAMA DISCO CHRISTO CHURCH AND OTHERS Vrs PROPHET JEHU-APPIAH and ANOTHER (CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/31/2012 11TH NOVEMBER,2015)
LAW TIP
It is unprofessional and misleading for a lawyer to highlight only parts of the record that favors their client, to the court.
QUOTE FROM JUDGEMENT
“The reality of the situation is that since the filing of the particulars of the church with the Registrar-General’s office in 1959, they have undergone a lot of changes which are not reflected in these exhibits. So it was prudent for Counsel for the appellant to have pointed out these changes which could be found on the record; rather he chose to point out those which he believed were in favour of his client. That was quite unprofessional and dangerous. It is dangerous in the sense that if the court is to go by counsel’s line of reasoning the only logical conclusion would be that since the defendant was unknown in the records of the Registrar-General, then he has never been Akaboha. That would be absurd, to say the least. That is why counsel should have been very candid with the court and to tell us the true state of affairs in the church as it existed at the date of the commencement of these proceedings”. MUSAMA DISCO CHRISTO CHURCH AND OTHERS Vrs PROPHET JEHU-APPIAH and ANOTHER (CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/31/2012 11TH NOVEMBER,2015)