AI Summary

Generated 0 seconds ago

Case Overview

The case of NUUMO NYAKOMLE (DECEASED) & 7ORS. VRS NII TETTEH ASHONG revolves around a dispute over the removal of the Respondent, Nii Tetteh Ashong, as the Chief Fisherman of Kpone Traditional Area. The Appellants sought a declaration that the Respondent had been validly removed from office and consequential orders for accounts and delivery of properties associated with his office.

Area of Law

This case falls under the area of Chieftaincy Law, specifically dealing with the jurisdiction of courts in matters affecting chieftaincy.

Key Legal Issue

The central question addressed by the court was whether the trial court had jurisdiction to adjudicate over the matter, given that it was a cause or matter affecting chieftaincy.

Legal Principles Applied

Key legal principles applied in this case include the definition of a chief under Article 277 of the 1992 Constitution, the meaning of a cause or matter affecting chieftaincy under Section 117 of the Courts Act, 1993, and the categories of chiefs under Section 58 of the Chieftaincy Act, 2008.

The Ruling

The Supreme Court ultimately ruled on the jurisdiction of the trial court to hear the case, determining whether the dispute constituted a chieftaincy matter.

Significance

This case is significant for legal practitioners as it clarifies the distinction between a chief and other traditional leaders, such as a Chief Fisherman, and the jurisdiction of courts in matters affecting chieftaincy, providing guidance on the application of relevant legal principles in similar disputes.

Judgment/Court Decision

NUUMO NYAKOMLE (DECEASED) & 7ORS. VRS NII TETTEH ASHONG

Supreme Court 2024

Presiding Justice

SACKEY TORKORNOO (MRS.) CJ

Date of Judgment

2nd February 2024

Neutral Citation

[2024] SUPREMECOURT 37

Coram

SACKEY TORKORNOO (MRS.) CJ (Presiding) AMADU JSC PROF. MENSA-BONSU (MRS.) JSC KULENDI JSC ASIEDU JSC

Parties

Plaintiff/Appellant

NUUMO NYAKOMLE (DECEASED) & 7ORS

Defendant/Respondent

NII TETTEH ASHONG

Full Judgment

Sign in to view full document

The full text of this document is available to registered members. Join our community of legal professionals today.