REPUBLIC v. MAJOR CLIFFORD ATTA WIRROM (RTD)
2012
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- MARFUL-SAU, JA (PRESIDING)
- HONYENUGA, JA
- DENNIS ADJEI, JA
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Probate and Succession
- Criminal Law and Procedure
2012
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This appeal concerns Atta Wirrom’s conviction by the High Court, Cape Coast, for contempt and perjury arising from his caveat opposing respondents’ application for letters of administration to the estate of Joseph Dumah Quaison, who died testate in 1969. The will appointed Joseph Acquah as executor and Atta Wirrom as trustee of a house in Accra. A 1987 default judgment in the High Court, Accra, purported to remove Wirrom as trustee. In 2011, respondents initiated contempt proceedings claiming the caveat interfered with justice and that Wirrom falsely denied knowledge of the 1987 judgment. The Court of Appeal, per Marful-Sau JA, held the affidavit failed to identify a breached order; filing a caveat is lawful, and any alleged perjury must be pursued under criminal procedure, not Order 50. Dennis Adjei JA concurred, emphasizing the penal nature of contempt and the proof standard, and the court unanimously set aside the conviction, fine, and costs.
MARFUL-SAU, JA: -
This appeal is taken against the ruling of the High Court sitting at Cape Coast dated the 28th November 2011. Three grounds were formulated in the Notice of Appeal filed on the 7th December 2011 and found at page 140 of the record of appeal. The grounds are as follows:-
‘’i)The ruling/decision of the Court has effectively undermined a subsisting order made earlier on by the Court IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF JOSEPH DUMAH QUAISON(DECEASED) for the parties to lead evidence in support of their dispositions in their respective affidavits.
ii) The Respondent/Appellant has not been duly served with any judgment and therefore could not be said to have wilfully disobeyed any order or judgment in any previous suit.
iii)The Applicants/Respondents failed to satisfy the standard of proof as required of them by law and the Court erred in holding that the Respondent/Appellant was liable for contempt.’’
Having studied the record of appeal, I am of the opinion that the appeal raises one fundamental issue to be resolved which is whether the conviction of the appellant for contempt is justified in law. I will address this issue but first let me appraise the proceedings that have given cause to the appeal.
The facts of this case are simple. On the 10th day of May 1969, one Joseph Dumah Quaison executed a document as his last Will and Testament. By that Will the testator appointted one Joseph Acquah alias Kweku Aduakwa the Executor of the Will, charged to distribute the properties to persons mentioned therein. However by paragraph 3 of the Will the testator appointed his nephew Atta Wirrom, the respondent/appellant herein, Trustee of his building in Accra.
On an allegation that the said Atta Wirrom had mismanaged the affairs of the house in Accra, an action was commenced in the High Court Accra to remove him as the Trustee of the house. In that action a default judgment was entered against the respondent/appellant herein on the 14th April 1987, discharging him as the trustee of the estate.
Nothing seemed to have happened between the respondent/ appellant and the estate till the Applicant/Respondents herein applied for the grant of Letters of Administration for the estate of Joseph Dumah Quaison(Deceased) in Suit No.E4/73/09 filed on the 9th July 2009 in the High Court, Cape Coast. While the application was pending the respondent/appellant filed a caveat against the application for the grant of Letters of Administration. On the 8th February 2011, th