APC loses again in court, as Justice Fisher rules against ex-President Koroma and others

Justice Adrian Fisher Rules against APC

As expected, Justice Adrian Fisher ruled against the APC in the Application for leave by lawyers of the APC to appeal against his own judgment which the lawyers for the APC contended was erroneous and not supported by law.

Justice Adrian Fisher ruled against the APC as expected not because the application lacked merit or because of want of better legal arguments by the APC lawyers, but because the Judge has put himself out there as inherently biased, and has often descended into the arena.

It could be recalled that after Justice Fisher slammed slammed an injunction restraining the party from holding any convention or meetings, Ady Macauley ESQ. made an application to vary the injunction to allow the party to hold an emergency National Delegate Conference solely for the purposes of adopting the draft constitution. This application was supported by Lawyers Africanus Sorie Sesay and lawyer Ibrahim I Mansaray representing O F Yansaneh and Ernest Bai Koroma Respectively. Justice fisher granted this application but also included an order to exclude the National Secretary General and other members of the party from taking part as delegates in the NDC.

Ady Macauley Esq. and other APC lawyers filed motions to seek the leave of the High Court to appealed against the decision of justice Fisher to exclude the National Secretary General and other members of the party from taking part as delegates at the NDC to adopt the constitution.

Adrian Fisher refused the application for leave to appeal today. What captured the attention of the audience was the very civil but interesting exchanges between Justice Fisher and Lawyer Ady Macauley Esq. representing the APC and deputizing lawyer I I Mansaray for EBK. In his judgment, Justice Fisher attempted to rebuke the APC for appealing against what he said was the decision to go to a NDC when it was their Lawyer, Ady Macauley Esq., that asked the Court to allow the Party to hold an NDC to adopt the draft constitution. Ady Macauley ESQ. Was quick to correct the Judge on this. He said my Lord I will not argue with your ruling today before you because it is legally impossible to do so. If I am dissatisfied with it I will go to the Court of Appeal. However my lord, it would appear that the reasoning in your ruling is at cross purpose with my submissions during legal arguments. If your Lordship would look at orders 1,2&3 of the orders prayed for in the Notice of Motion filed, it is clear that I only sought leave of this Court to appeal against a portion of the orders you gave and not all. The portion I sought leave to appeal against is that which excluded the National Secretary General and other members of the Party from taking part as delegates in the NDC to adopt the draft constitution, I agree did not appeal against going to convention which we had asked for any way. I just want to clear this especially for members of the press so they know that the leave I sought was not to appeal against the convention but against your decision to exclude certain members from taking part in the NDC as delegates. This is for clarity only my Lord and I hope that members of the press and the public get that distinction. Africanus Sorie Sesay ESQ. Also pointed this out to the Judge on behalf of his client.

Justice Fisher initially awarded a cost of le 60,000,000 against the APC. Ady Macauley argued that the purport of cost in an action is not punitive but fair monetary compensation for work done by lawyers. He said my Lord I don’t think the lawyer for the Plaintiff deserves that amount, he did not file an affidavit in opposition nor did he cite a single case during legal arguments and this shows how much less industry he employed in preparation to oppose the application. My Lord it is too much on the high side of the scale. The Judge later reduced the cost to le 30,000,000.

Related Posts