THE REPUBLIC v. DANIEL DARKWAH AND VICTORIA WORNA; EX-PARTE MRS. LYDIA OSEI MARFO

This is an Application for leave to Order attendance of Deponent for Cross-

Examination under Order 38 rule 2(3) of C. I 47.

It was filed by Counsel for and on behalf of the Respondents; Daniel Darkwah and

Victoria Worna in a Contempt Application pending before this Court.

The said Contempt Application was brought under Order 50 rule 1 of C.I 47 by

Applicant, Mrs. Lydia Osei Marfo on 23rd November, 2021 for an Order committing

the Respondents therein for Contempt for an act bordering on outright disrespect of

the authority of this Court.

In the course of the trial, the said Respondents therein have filed this instant Motion.

The Applicant herein; Daniel Darkwah (1st Respondent in the pending Contempt

Application) avers that there are certain facts in the Affidavit in Support of the

Motion for Committal for Contempt which was deposed to by one Stanley Easemon-

Quartey which facts have been denied in their Affidavit in Opposition.

He further avers that there are certain allegations in the said Supporting Affidavit of

this contempt Application which its veracity or otherwise can be established by

cross-examining the deponent.

For this reason, 1st Respondent/Applicant is praying that the Court orders the

attendance of the said Deponent Stanley Easemon-Quartey for Cross-Examination.

In opposing this Application, Respondent herein states that Applicant herein has

failed to demonstrate to the Court precisely which allegations cannot be verified on

the basis of the Affidavit evidence.

Also, they have failed to provide cogent reasons for the exercise of the Court’s

discretion to order the attendance and cross-examination of the deponent.

The issue to be determined by this Court is whether or not the Court should order

the attendance of the said deponent for Cross-examination.

Order 38 rule 2 (3) provides:

“On any application in any cause or matter, evidence may be given by

Affidavit unless in the case of any such application, any provision of these

rules otherwise provides or the Court otherwise directs, but the Court may,

on the application of any party, order the attendance for cross-examination

of the person making the Affidavit and where, after an Order has been made,

the person in question does not attend, that person’s Affidavit shall not be

used as evidence without leave of this Court”.

In analysing this Application, I have examined all the evidence adduced herein: the

Motion paper, the Affidavit in Support, the Affidavit in