The UG SRC Judicial Board on Friday, April 1 dismissed an application to set aside the Ex-Parte interlocutory injunction granted by the Board on Wednesday March 30.
The court on Wednesday granted the injunction after counsels for Joseph Agyekum argued that their client will face irreparable damage if the vetting which was set to begin was allowed to progress.
The defendant (The Electoral Commission) filed for the dismissal praying that the court dismisses the injunction on grounds that plaintiff (Joseph Agyekum) had failed to attach relevant documents to the affidavit in support of the Ex-Parte Injunction application. Counsel Barnabas Abisa moved the motion for the defendant.
Counsels for plaintiff, Kwame Twumasi Ankrah in his response argued that the defendant had failed to satisfy the requirements of setting aside an injunction as indicated in the Brown and Newel case of 1838.
“Counsel has failed to prove that there was suppression of fact and fraudulent misrepresentation of facts”, he said.
The court dismissed the application on the basis that the defendant had failed to prove the two requirements spelled out in the Brown and Newel case.
Hearing of the substantive matter could not progress as Counsels for the plaintiff had failed to file their statement of case (for substantive case) as well as Counsels for defendant failing to file a response.
Joseph Agyekum, a presidential aspirant had been disqualified by the Electoral Commission for failing to meet the Constitutional requirement of a Cumulative Grade Point Average of 3.0.
Article 30(1)(b) of the UG SRC Constitution reads
” He has attained a Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) of 3.0 as at the time of filing his nomination “.
Counsels for Joseph Agyekum maintain that their client had met this requirement as at the time of filing his nomination last week Thursday.
Presiding Justice, Nadia Antwi adjourned hearing to Saturday ,April 2 and ordered parties to file relevant documents before Saturday .
# Campus Exclusive