AYINE VS ATTORNEY GENERAL & AMIDU

I have this morning, the 26th March 2018 at 08.31O’clock in the forenoon been served at my residence with a “Motion On Leave To File Supplementary Statement of Case” filed by the Plaintiff in this action on 23rd March 2018 with a supporting affidavit which states the main reason for the unusual procedure adopted by the Plaintiff in his paragraph 3 thereof.

The sworn reason stated by the Plaintiff for making the application for leave to file the Supplementary Statement of Case and the draft copy of the proposed Supplementary Statement of case shows beyond doubt a Plaintiff who seeks to improve his cause of action after it had accrued with the subterfuge of: (i) addressing issues raised by the 1st Defendant in her Statement of Case by introducing new facts, evidence and legal arguments into the Plaintiff’s Statement of Case filed on 12th February 2018 and (ii) also introducing an Exhibit “LEAVE 1” dated Wednesday, 1st November, 2017 entitled “PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES OFFICIAL REPORT” which had always been available to the Plaintiff at the time of commencing this action with the sole object of improving the Plaintiff’s cause of action after the 1st and 2nd Defendants had entered their defences to the Plaintiff’s action.

I oppose the application because it is not supported by the Supreme Court Rules, 1996 (C.I. 16) under which the originating action was commenced.

---