Preface

129
4. Appeal must be directly against the decision of Cadi’s Court that gave
judgment in the case being appealed against and not against the Chief’s
Court which merely enforced it.
RULING
Written and delivered by Justice S. U. Mukhtar
This is an appeal against the decision of Cadi Court of Kanifing. The
appellant Sankung Ceesay is not satisfied with the lower court’s decision, he
therefore appealed to this Honourable Panel upon the following grounds:
1. That the Chief was wrong in law for ordering the eviction of the appellant
from his father’s property including members of his personal family.
2. That Chief’s order giving the property to the respondent is against the rule of
inheritance and against Sharia.
3. That the judgment was not based on any law and is against the rule of equity
and natural justice.
In the course of hearing the appeal today being the 14 th day of April, 2011 an
issue was raised, namely:
1. That the appeal was filed out of time,
2. That the parties are not properly joined,
3. That the appellant failed to understand that the case was heard and decided
by the Cadi’s Court Kanifing. The Chief’s Court only enforced and executed
the judgment of the Cadi Court.
We agree that this appeal brought by the appellant before us is full of flaws.
The judgment was delivered by the lower court on 31 st December 2009 and the
appeal was filed on 28 th March 2011. This is apparently a violation of Order III
Rule 5 of the Cadi Appeals Panel Rules 2009. The rule provides that an appeal