CAO v Brown et al [2004] LRSC 30; 42 LLR 340 (2004) (16 August 2004)
CHUM FU CAO, Appellant, v. G. RUDOLPHUS BROWN, Assistant Minister, Hearing Officer and K. MOORE ERIC, Appellees.
JUDGMENT WITHOUT OPINION
Decided: August 16, 2004.
At the call of the case, Counsellor Nyanti Tuan appeared for the appellant, and Counsellor Paul Mulbah Richards appeared for the appellees. Appellant’s counsel then made an application to this Court to permit him to make a submission after representations have been noted, which request was granted. In his submission appellant’s counsel stated that the procedural steps as required by law to complete an appeal were never complied with on his part; as such the records cannot be opened. In view of this, counsel for appellees should have filed a motion to dismiss and allow this Court to rule on same. He therefore requested the said appeal to be dismissed, to which counsel for appellees conceded. Appellees’ Counsel having conceded to the submission of appellant’s counsel, it is hereby adjudged that the submission should be and the same is granted and the appeal is dismissed with costs against the appellant. The Clerk of this Court is ordered to send a mandate to the court below commanding the judge presiding therein to resume jurisdiction over the cause and enforce the judgment. And it is hereby so ordered.