A: Introduction
On 18 th January, 2022, the Supreme Court gave its ruling in Ex Parte Ecobank Ghana Limited [1] and reserved its reasons for a later date. The main issue for determination in the application was whether C.I 132[2] has taken away the High Court’s jurisdiction to hear applications filed after an appeal is lodged against a High Court’s decision. Many were those who waited for the Supreme Court’s decision and the reasons thereof with bated breath. The new amendments introduced into the Court of Appeal Rules by C.I 132 had given many lawyers and judges anxious moments. This article sets out the basis for the application in Ex Parte Ecobank Ghana Limited. It discusses the genesis of the problem the parties encountered in the High Court that ended in the application for judicial review before the Supreme Court. The article posits that the conclusion reached by the Supreme Court that C.I 132 did not take away the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction to entertain applications pending appeal, is great and a welcome development[3]. But the question that remains to be answered is whether the reasons given by the Supreme Court in support of its ruling is grounded in law. The article concludes by suggesting that C.I 132 only came to create problems where none previously existed and the Rules of Court Committee must do the needful and restore the revoked provisions. That way, the Supreme Court may be saved the head-scratching task of dealing with another application cast in the mold of Ex Parte Ecobank Ghana Limited.
B: The case: Ex Parte Ecobank Ghana Limited
The case involved a simple set of facts. The High Court (Commercial Division), Accra handled a suit between the interested parties as plaintiff and defendant. The plaintiff, as judgment-creditor, went into execution and instituted garnishee proceedings against two banks, that is, Ecobank Ghana Limited (the applicant) and another bank. The High Court made a garnishee order absolute against only the applicant for the payment of the whole of the judgment debt. The applicant was unhappy with the Court’s decision and so, filed an appeal against the order to the Court of Appeal. The applicant applied to the Court of Appeal for stay of execution pending appeal. The Court of Appeal refused the application. The applicant then went back to the High Court with an application under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction for […]
