He advised that since the matter was a family issue, it would serve the interest of both parties if it was settled amicably out of court, explaining that irrespective of which way the judgement would go, it would not engender unity in the party.
He said the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) tended to save the time of both the court and litigants, prevented loss of resources and led to a win-win situation for both parties.
On the last adjourned date, the parties indicated their intention to the court to attempt an out-of-court settlement, but that did not happen.
The adjournment was precipitated by a preliminary legal challenge raised by Mr Felix Datsumor, the counsel for the plaintiff, Mr Linus Njonolah, who has hauled the NDC National Executive Committee (NEC) before court for overstaying their four-year term of office.
Mr Njonolah, who is a former President of the Akokerri College of Education Tertiary Education Institutions Network (TEIN) of the NDC, is also praying the court to declare that the entire guidelines put together by the NEC to regulate the elections of the party executive from the regional to the national levels were ultra-vires to the powers of the NEC.
In yesterday’s proceedings, Mr Datsumor said there were anomalies with the motion and the notice of appearance the lawyers for the NDC had filed.
He, therefore, raised preliminary legal point challenging the competence of the application they intended to move.
Mr Datsumor pointed out that the chamber’s registration number of the NDC counsel was conspicuously absent on the face of these two processes, the notice of appearance and the motion to set aside the plaintiff motion.
“Under the legal professional act, a qualified lawyer has to practise from a registered chamber and the chamber’s registration number, together with the said lawyer’s practising licence number ought to be endorsed on any process emanating from the said lawyer”, he explained.
He added that on the notice of appearance, the solicitor’s number appeared on it but that alone was not sufficient because there was presumption that the law office was registered and submitted that being the law firm representing the NDC, its lawyers ought to show that they were operating from a registered law firm.
On the motion, he said both the licence and the chamber’s registration number were visibly absent and asked the court to throw out the motion filed by the NDC lawyers.
Rebutting the claims, the counsel for the NDC, Nana Kwesi Boitey, said Mr Datsumor’s claim had no basis in law because it was not in any law that a lawyer must operate from a registered chamber.
He explained that lawyers were supposed to renew their licences with the General Legal Counsel, which requirements include chamber’s registration number, and therefore when the lawyer was registered, then the authorities have been satisfied with everything.
Nana Boitey stated, however, that there was no law requiring that the chamber’s registration number must be endorsed on any document and that what the law required was that the lawyer’s licence be endorsed on the document, which was duly done.
He, therefore, asked the court to dismiss the claim by Lawyer Datsumor.
Justice Bonoo adjourned the case to October 14, 2014 for his ruling.
Source: Daily Graphic.