ERROR OF LAW AND /OR MISDIRECTION IN RESPECT OF APPEALS
Errors of law include the following:
- Failure to have regards to material evidence
- Taking account of and being influenced by immaterial evidence
- Inadequate reasons
- Unfair procedure
- Misunderstanding or misconstruction of the law
- Disregarding a relevant statutory provision
- Failing to give effect to a binding decision of a superior court
- Irrationality
In alleging that the trial judge erred in law an appellant must specify what the error is and give brief particulars of the said error.
In Alawiye vrs Agyekum [1984-86] 1 GLR, 185, it was held that it was only a ground of appeal alleging a misdirection or error of law which calls for particulars of the misdirection or error to be clearly stated.
In Odgers’ Principles of Pleading and Practise in Civil Actions in the High Court Of Justice, 22nd ed, at page 340, it was stated that ….”it is not enough for the appellant merely to say, for example, that he complains of ‘misdirection’, the notice must state in what manner the judge misdirected himself or the jury”.
A ground of appeal alleging that the trial court gave an ‘erroneous decision’ or misdirected himself without specifying the particulars of the erroneous decision or misdirection is inadmissible. see; Zabrama vrs Segbedzi [1991] 2 GLR 221, CA, and Alawiye vrs Akyekum supra, see also Brobbey’ s Trial Courts & Tribunals of Ghana, at page 648.
Under Order 51 rule (2) (3) of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules C.I 47, it is stated that ‘if the grounds of appeal allege misdirection or error of law, particulars of the misdirection or error shall be clearly stated.’
The use of the word shall in the provision of the rule makes it mandatory that such grounds must strictly conform with the provisions of the rules and the best characteristic way for making it more special way by the maidthis airbnb cleaning los angeles and also mentioned supra and furthermore, non-compliance with the provisions of the rules renders such ground invalid and incompetent and therefore liable to be struck out.
By the rules of court, a ground of appeal should be a precise, clear and a direct statement of the decision being challenged on appeal
It is well settled law, that where there is no issue for determination raised from a particular ground of appeal, that ground of appeal is deemed abandoned by the appellant and would be liable to be struck out.
In United Bank of Africa vrs Afrimpex Enterprises Limited (2013) LPELR-22603 (CA) it was held that “…it is well settled law that a ground of appeal must always contain clear, precise an unequivocal statement of the decision being attacked…………. Such ground therefore must contain particulars of the mistake or error or misdirection alleged except , of course, a general or omnibus ground and where such particulars or statements are inexistent, it tantamounts to gross non-compliance with the rules and therefore it makes such ground incompetent..”
It is well settled law, that where there is no issue for determination raised from a particular ground of appeal, that ground of appeal is deemed abandoned by the appellant and would be liable to be struck out.
In the United Bank of Africa case supra, it was also held….’ Where the ground of appeal alleges misdirection or error of law, the particulars and the nature of the misdirection or error shall be clearly stated……………..a ground of misdirection or error of law firms must satisfy these conditions…(a) the passage in the judgement where a misdirection was alleged to have occurred specifying the nature of the error in law or misdirection….(b) give full substantial particulars of the alleged error in law or misdirection…”
In the same case supra on the effect of particulars of error of law or misdirection of the ground complained of not set out separately in the ground of appeal, it was held…” the law is that where the particulars of error that is supposed to highlight the error complained of in a ground of appeal are neither distinctly set out under a different heading nor embedded in the ground of appeal itself, the ground of appeal so raised with such particulars will be rendered incompetent.