It is obvious that the 19th January was the date fixed for the hearing of the summons for directions, and not the hearing date generally. On that day the plaintiff attended Court, but the defendant did not; and neither counsel for plaintiff nor counsel for defendant did so. It would seem that neither counsel could have understood that on that date the case would be heard on its merits. But the Commissioner, overlooking this fact, called upon the plaintiff on the 19th January to give evidence. With reluctance the plaintiff did so, but he could not continue the case further after his own evidence. The Court thereupon gave judgment dismissing the plaintiff s claim. We are satisfied that this was an error, since the case was not at that stage ripe for hearing on its merits. For this reason we set aside the judgment, and remit the case to the Court below for rehearing.
DANSO v. ADDAI [1959] GLR 376 [1959] SLR (CA) 40 · Court of Appeal · 1959 · KORSAH CJ
Read it in the judgment