JUDGMENT

MARFUL – SAU, JA: - This appeal is taken from the ruling or orders of the High Court (Fast Track Division) Accra dated the 4th of June 2009. The relevant facts of the case regarding this appeal would be stated as and when necessary. In the notice of appeal filed on the 9th of June 2009, appellant formulated five grounds of appeal, which were all argued together by Counsel for appellant in his written submission to this court. From the notice of appeal it seems the appellant main complaint is about two orders or decisions made by the trial court on the 4th of June, 2009. These complaints are:-

a) The trial court’s upholding objections raised by counsel for the respondent to questions put to the respondent during crossexamination regarding previous statements concerning the purchase of a ring for the ceremony held on 1st October,2005, made on oath by the respondent in an affidavit in earlier proceedings between the parties in a court in England;

b) The trial court’s ruling regarding the cross-examination of the respondent on questions concerning the viewing of a DVD recording and photographs of the ceremony held on 1st October, 2005.

However, the five grounds as argued only addressed the first complaint, that is, the trial court’s refusal to admit questions concerning the respondent’s earlier statements in an affidavit concerning the purchase of the ring. It seems therefore that the second complaint was abandoned by the appellant. The entire proceeding of the 4th of June 2009 covers pages 127 to 153 of the record of appeal. On that day four different orders were made by the trial court, two of which are the subject of this appeal. As already observed appellant did not argue the complaint concerning the viewing of the DVD and the photographs, for that reason this appeal will be limited to the complaint against the ruling on the previous statement of the respondent in the court proceedings in England.

The question that has given cause to this appeal is at page 138 and 139 of the record of appeal and for purposes of sound reasoning I shall reproduce the salient part of the proceedings below:-

Q. Now, I put it to you that you deposed to an affidavit on the 9th of November 2007 in the London proceedings?

MR. OKUDZETO: He cannot be cross-examined as to the contents of an affidavit in another suit. If allowed this would mean adopting the proceedings in the suit which is not before this court. The English court staye