Jurisdiction, Venue and Commencement of Civil Actions
This domain tests whether you can pick the court with power to hear a civil claim, the station at which it should be filed, and the step that validly commences it. Expect questions anchored on the Courts Act, 1993 (Act 459) and the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (C.I. 47).
Jurisdiction is three separate questions
- Subject-matter: the High Court has unlimited original civil jurisdiction; a District Court is confined to the monetary limit and classes of action permitted for its grade under Act 459 as amended. A claim above the limit is not incompetent before the High Court, but is generally misconceived before a District Court.
- Exclusive pockets: the Supreme Court alone has original exclusive jurisdiction over the interpretation and enforcement of the Constitution (Article 130); the High Court exercises supervisory jurisdiction over lower courts (Article 141).
- The person: power over the defendant depends on valid service, dealt with in a later domain.
Venue
Choosing the right court is not enough; the action must be filed at the proper station. The guiding factors are the defendant's residence or place of business and the place where the cause of action arose. A defendant sued at an inconvenient station may apply for transfer or to have the action struck out for improper venue, and the court may transfer in the interest of justice.
Commencement
Order 2 of C.I. 47 prescribes the modes: writ of summons for debts, damages and disputed facts; originating motion where the rules so provide (for example judicial review); petition for probate, matrimonial and similar causes. The writ must be endorsed with the claim or a summary of it, and remains valid for service for twelve months, renewable on application before expiry.
Worked example
A Kumasi supplier contracted in Tamale to deliver goods to a company registered in Accra, and sues on an unpaid GHS 400,000 invoice, filing the writ in Kumasi where it trades. Reasoning: the High Court plainly has subject-matter jurisdiction; venue is wrong because neither the defendant's residence nor the cause of action connects Kumasi. The defendant can apply to strike out or transfer. If the claim were GHS 4,000, the High Court would still have jurisdiction, but the action would ordinarily belong in the appropriate District Court.
Traps that cost marks
Confusing venue with jurisdiction; pleading a venue objection as a jurisdictional one; overlooking limitation under the Limitation Act, 1972 (NRCD 54) - six years for contract and tort, twelve for land; issuing a writ but failing to serve it; and allowing a twelve-month writ to lapse without renewal.