In a legal development that has captured public attention, Kwame Boateng Atuahene, a solicitor representing the plaintiff, has filed a Motion on Notic
In a legal development that has captured public attention, Kwame Boateng Atuahene, a solicitor representing the plaintiff, has filed a Motion on Notice seeking an interlocutory injunction against the organisers of the 2023 National Science and Maths Quiz.
The plaintiff’s application is directed at the defendant, and it aims to prevent the upcoming Grand Finale scheduled for Monday, October 30, 2023, at the National Theatre at 2:00 pm. This legal move comes against the backdrop of a matter that is pending final determination before the court.
The plaintiff is urgently seeking the court’s intervention to halt the organisation of the prestigious educational event.
The injunction is directed not only at the defendant but also at their agents, assigns, workmen, and privies who might be involved in the event. This legal maneuver has the potential to disrupt the highly anticipated event, which attracts participation from students, educators, and science enthusiasts from across the country.
A dispute arose after Prempeh College raised objections to the riddle during the semi-final contest, citing that their contestant’s answer, “principle of superposition,” deserved full marks.
They argued that this principle was the same as the “principle of linear superposition” mentioned in the contest as the answer.
Responding to Prempeh College, the organizers of the National Science and Maths Quiz (NSMQ), Primetime Limited, have affirmed their decision not to award any marks to Prempeh College for the answer they provided in a riddle during the 2023 semi-final contest between Opoku Ware and Pope John Seminary School.
This follows a protest initiated by Prempeh College, requesting a review of the result and the awarding of the required marks for their answer.
In a letter addressed to Prempeh College, Primetime Limited stated that they had thoroughly reviewed the matter, including discussions with their physics consultant and the Quiz Mistress, Professor Elsie Effah Kaufmann, and after careful consideration, the organizers concluded that there was no error in the initial decision made during the competition.
“The Quiz Mistress exercises discretion on whether an answer provided by a contestant is sufficiently responsive and would have accepted the answer given by the Prempeh College contestants if, in her professional opinion, the target key and the answer given by the contestants were synonymous.
“She did not in this case, opting instead to maintain the more precise original key. When the complaint came to the attention of the Physics consultant, full consideration was given to all the issues raised, and the protesters, after receiving complete attention, were satisfied with the explanation and counterexample that were given by the consultant.
“The Quiz Mistress’s ruling is affirmed,” part of the statement read.