LAW TIP
To determine jurisdiction in chieftaincy matters, focus should be on the plaintiff’s claim and the real issue in dispute not on how the claim is worded or the defendant’s response. NII NORTEY OWUO III v GA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL & 4 ORS (J4/40/2016) (25/01/2017)
QUOTE FROM JUDGEMENT
“In the case of Re Nungua Chieftaincy affairs; Oda Ayiku IV vrs Attorney General (Borketey Laweh) XIV Applicant in [2010] SCGLR 413 Ansah JSC at page 432 concurring in his decision in the case of Anim v. Ababio [1973] 1 GLR 509 held; “when the jurisdiction of the High Court in a cause or matter affecting chieftaincy arose in the case of Anim v. Ababio, it was held that jurisdiction was determined by the plaintiffs’ demand and not by a defendant’s answer, and the court must apply the test of what was the real issue between the parties and not look at the wording of the plaint’. The issues in this case are clearly matters that cannot be resolved without going into whether the plaintiff was ever a chief and whether he has ever been properly destooled, and whether the 5” defendant is a person legitimately installed as Osu Mantse. These are questions that can only be appropriately asked and answered in the Greater Accra House of Chiefs. It is therefore our considered view that both the High Court and the Court of Appeal were right and so the appeal is dismissed.” NII NORTEY OWUO III v GA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL & 4 ORS (J4/40/2016) (25/01/2017)
LAW TIP
Jurisdiction must be determined before any other matter. If a court lacks jurisdiction to hear a writ, it cannot consider any applications arising from that writ. NII NORTEY OWUO v GA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL & 4 ORS (J4/40/2016) (25/01/2017)
QUOTE FROM JUDGEMENT
“After reviewing the decision and the submissions of both counsels, the Court of Appeal came to a conclusion that the Trial judge was right in dismissing the writ on the grounds that the matter was a cause or matter affecting chieftaincy. The plaintiff has appealed to us. There is a small point of law which we will like to briefly comment on. It will be seen that the trial judge dismissed the application for injunctive relief on one ground before upholding the preliminary objection on the grounds of jurisdiction. Even though it is not a ground of appeal before us and it really did not affect his overall reasoning on the issues before him, it is worth pointing out, as the apex court that, since by his reasoning the writ was not before the appropriate forum, he was not vested with jurisdiction to rule on the application for injunction. May be he felt obliged to rule on it since that was the main application before him. But this court has stated time without number that jurisdiction has to be determined first before anything else. If a court has no jurisdiction to entertain any writ then an application subsequent to the writ cannot be entertained either.” NII NORTEY OWUO v GA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL & 4 ORS (J4/40/2016) (25/01/2017)
LAW TIP
The proper forum for a case is determined by the substance of the claim, not how the plaintiff labels it.
QUOTE FROM JUDGEMENT
“It is not how the plaintiff has couched his claim, which in this case is a claim of fraud et al, but the substance of the claim, that should determine the appropriate forum.” NII NORTEY OWUO III v GA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL & 4 ORS (J4/40/2016) (25/01/2017)
“If his long and laboured submissions before the High Court, the Court of Appeal and before us, created any doubt as to what the plaintiff is claiming, these quoted statements clearly expose the real and substantive reliefs being sought by the plaintiff. In the case of Re Nungua Chieftaincy affairs; Oda Ayiku IV vrs Attorney General (Borketey Laweh) XIV Applicant in [2010] SCGLR 413 Ansah JSC at page 432 concurring in his decision in the case of Anim v. Ababio [1973] 1 GLR 509 held; “when the jurisdiction of the High Court in a cause or matter affecting chieftaincy arose in the case of Anim v. Ababio, it was held that jurisdiction was determined by the plaintiffs demand and not by a defendant’s answer, and the court must apply the test of what was the real issue between the parties and not look at the wording of the plaint*” NII NORTEY OWUO III v GA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL & 4 ORS (J4/40/2016) (25/01/2017)
“The issues in this case are clearly matters that cannot be resolved without going into whether the plaintiff was ever a chief and whether he has ever been properly destooled, and whether the 5th defendant is a person legitimately installed as Osu Mantse. These are questions that can only be appropriately asked and answered in the Greater Accra House of Chiefs. It is therefore our considered view that both the High Court and the Court of Appeal were right and so the appeal is dismissed. NII NORTEY OWUO III v GA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL & 4 ORS (J4/40/2016) (25/01/2017)
LAW TIP
A court must first determine if it has jurisdiction before addressing any application. If the court lacks jurisdiction to hear a writ, it cannot rule on related applications like injunctions. NII NORTEY OWUO III v GA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL & 4 ORS (J4/40/2016) (25/01/2017)
QUOTE FROM JUDGEMENT
“After reviewing the decision and the submissions of both counsels, the Court of Appeal came to a conclusion that the Trial judge was right in dismissing the writ on the grounds that the matter was a cause or matter affecting chieftaincy. The plaintiff has appealed to us. There is a small point of law which we will like to briefly comment on. It will be seen that the trial judge dismissed the application for injunctive relief on one ground before upholding the preliminary objection on the grounds of jurisdiction. Even though it is not a ground of appeal before us and it really did not affect his overall reasoning on the issues before him, it is worth pointing out, as the apex court that, since by his reasoning the writ was not before the appropriate forum, he was not vested with jurisdiction to rule on the application for injunction. May be he felt obliged to rule on it since that was the main application before him. But this court has stated time without number that jurisdiction has to be determined first before anything else. If a court has no jurisdiction to entertain any writ then an application subsequent to the writ cannot be entertained either.” NII NORTEY OWUO III v GA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL & 4 ORS (J4/40/2016) (25/01/2017)