Nana Kweku Bofa & Ors V. Nana Kofi Kum & Ors (1940)
LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal
Construction of section 8 of the West African Court of Appeal Ordinance considered—Kudiabor v. Kudanu (hitherto unreported, non’ printed after this report) followed and appeal dismisSed.
Held : No jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Section 8 of the west African Court of Appeal Ordinance limited to appeals which his by virtue of statutory provisions.
There is no need to set out the facts.
A . G. Heward-Mills for Appellant.
E. O. Asafu-Adjaye (E. P. Asafu–Adjaye and E. Prompt); with him) for Respondent.
The following joint judgment was delivered :-
KINGDON, C.J., NIGERIA, PETRIDES, C.J., GOLD COAST AND BANNERMAN, J.
Decision upon the Preliminary objection :-
Counsel for the Appellant has been unable to point to any enactment expressly conferring upon this Court jurisdiction to hear this appeal. So far as this Court is aware there is none. Counsel falls back on section 8 of the West African Court of Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 5) which reads :-
“Notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained the Court of Appeal may entertain any appeal from a Court below on any terms which it thinks just.”
and he asks this Court to entertain this appeal under that section,
We are of opinion that we have no jurisdiction to do so, because we take the view that this section does not go so far as to confer a general jurisdiction to hear appeals from Courts below but must be construed as limited to those appeals which lie by virtue of the other provisions of the same Ordinance or the provisions of some other Ordinance. This is evidently the view taken both by the majority and dissenting Judge in the case of Dovlo Kudiabor v. Hulohoke Kudanu in which the West African Court of Appeal gave a judgment (which has not been reported) on the 14th November, 1932.
The preliminary objection is upheld and we hold that we have no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs assessed at £28 11s. 6d.