Try asking the following...
RULING
Background Facts
The Applicant Esther Kortatsi filed the instant Application on 20th November 2022 praying the court to cite the Respondents for contempt as they have prevented her from taking possession of her land in extent of 0. 901 of an acre situate, lying and being at Oyibi and registered with a Land Title Certificate No. T. D. 5275 dated 2011. The Applicant avers that as of April 18th, 2019, the District Court per His Honour Charles Kwasi Acheampong per a judgment authorized the Applicant to enter into execution in respect of land measuring 0. 901 Acre.
That pursuant to this, all efforts to take possession of the land had proved futile.
Applicant further avers, the 1st Respondent and 2nd respondent were the original persons she initiated the action for recovery of possession against in 2012 and obtained Judgment against them but they have failed to stop their encroachment on the land.
With respect to 3rd and 4th Respondents, the Applicant alleges they are privies and assigns of 1st and 2nd Respondent while the 5th Respondent is a workman of 3rd Respondent.
Applicant alleges that, these persons have refused to vacate the land and have continued to refuse to comply with the orders of the court pursuant to the execution the Writ of Possession.
Analysis Committal for Contempt is provided for under Order 43 rules (5) and (7) and Order 50 of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules, 2004 (C. I 47). Under Rule 1(1) of the Order 50, the power of the Court to punish for Contempt of Court may be exercised by an order of Committal.
In Republic v Sito I; Ex Parte Fordjour [2001-2002] SCGLR 322 the Supreme Court offered the following elements as constituting the offence of contempt: a. There should have been a judgment or order which required the contemnor to do or abstain from doing something; b. The contemnor knew what precisely he was expected to do or abstain from doing; and c. That he failed to comply with the terms of that judgment or the order and that his disobedience was willful.
In the instant case, the Writ of Possession on which Applicant bases the instant Application was issued on 18th December 2003 (see Exhibit ‘C’). Unless renewed before the expiration of twelve (12) months, this Writ of Possession has expired.
See the case of Ghana Commercial Bank vrs J. K Acka and 2 others, Number J4/06/2013, GHSC 148 and Order 44 Rule 9 (1) of C. I 47. From the processes before me it is this expired Writ of Possession that serves as the bed rock of the A