By Saio Marrah
The Sierra Leone Court of Appeal led by Justice Reginald Fynn is to on Thursday deliver a ruling regarding a case brought against Octea a diamond mining company based in Kono District, by Marginalized Affected Property Owners (MAPO) and others.
Justice Fynn said the court would issue the ruling after hearing arguments put forward by Lawyers Drucil E Taylor, and Chernor M.B. Jalloh as lead counsel for the defendants and appellants, respectively.
Lawyer Taylor called on the court to strike out the appeal because the appellant did not file their case within the 14-day period as provided by law, or seek an extension of the said time limit, which he said was a clear contravention of the rules of the court.
In his brief counterargument, Lawyer Jalloh told the court that a submission forwarded by the defendant took the presiding judge close to a whole year to deliver a judgment on and that it was after which he applied within the time frame.
He submitted a written argument to the court, which pointed out that following orders for Aiah Fengai and 73 others, Sia Janet Bayoh and MAPO’s legal action against all defendants at the High Court in Kenema dated 1st April 2019, the respondents submitted a motion seeking orders to strike out the said summon.
He said the defendants argued because the plaintiffs lack the “locus standi” capacity to enforce the Community Development Agreement, re-settlement agreements, mining lease agreement, and statutory provisions of the Mines and Minerals Act and the Environmental Protection Agency Act.
According to his written argument, Morie Momoh and 14 others issued a writ of summons at the High Court in the Makeni registry dated 5th October 2020 applying to halt orders against the defendants’ assets.
He said Justice Unisa Kamara heard the application and dismissed it, but ordered the consolidation of all matters in the Kenema High Court registry.
Thus the matter was transferred to Makeni wherein the respondent renewed their preliminary objections against the consolidated actions on the same application as against Aiah Fengai, Sia Janet Bayoh, and others.
It is noted that Justice Unisa’s “interlocutory ruling orders on the defendant’s preliminary objections dated 27th October 2022, struck out the entire consolidated summons.
He further argued that the plaintiffs appealed the said interlocutory ruling and sought an appeal hearing by way of notice appeal dated 22nd November 2023, having applied for and been granted leave to appeal by Justice Bawoh in his ruling dated 9th November 2023.
Thus, he argued that what should be determined by the court of appeal was whether the judgment of Justice Kamara dated 27th October 2022, was final or interlocutory.
The appellant also argued that the basis for the respondent’s motion that the plaintiff's notice of appeal was filed out of time and without an order for enlargement of time, is predicated on the assertion that the ruling of Justice Kamara upholding their preliminary objections was final and not interlocutory.
According to him, the defendant’s motion was baseless because the notice of appeal dated 22nd November 2023, was filed on time, duly dated, signed, and served as required.
Copyright © 2024 Politico (07/02/24)
