The Accra High Court’s decision to alter an injunction related to the funeral of legendary musician Daddy Lumba has raised questions about a judge’s power to vary orders after parties have left the court. The case involves a dispute between Daddy Lumba’s immediate family and the family head, Kofi Owusu, along with Transitions Funeral Home, over funeral arrangements and fund management.
Initially, the court granted an injunction restraining the burial and requiring the applicants to deposit *GH₵2 million* as security for potential costs. After the parties left the court, the judge revisited the order, allowing the funeral to proceed when the applicants failed to make the payment on time. Legal experts are examining whether the judge had authority to modify the order post-delivery, especially under Ghana’s procedural rules.
### Key Details of the Case
– *Initial Injunction*: The court barred the family head from organizing the funeral and prohibited Transitions Funeral Home from releasing Daddy Lumba’s body, citing exclusion of the immediate family from arrangements.
– *Monetary Condition*: A GH₵2 million deposit was imposed to cover funeral expenses, with failure to pay leading to the injunction’s removal.
– *Legal Debate*: Under Ghanaian law, once an order is made and parties have exited proceedings, the judge’s ability to vary it may be limited unless specific procedural grounds exist, such as new evidence or procedural errors.
– *Cultural Context*: The case highlights tensions between Akan customary funeral rights and legal procedural requirements, emphasizing consultation with the immediate family.
The judicial service’s practices and Order 25 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (CI 47), guide such decisions, focusing on undertakings and injunctions. The Daddy Lumba case continues to attract public interest, reflecting broader discussions on judicial discretion and family rights in Ghana.