THE REPUBLIC vs CELESTINA OSEI & ORS
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP, JUSTICE GIFTY AGYEI ADDO, HIGH COURT JUDGE.
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Ghana High Court contempt application was brought by siblings of the Respondent after they obtained a judgment and were placed in possession of three rooms at a Regimanuel Estate house in Accra, which the bailiff sealed. The Applicants alleged the Respondent broke the seals and retook the rooms, and admitted the conduct at the police station. The Respondent denied the allegations, insisted she was not the person sued (Celestina Osei) but Celestine Ahiable, and claimed lack of service. The court held that underlying court orders must be obeyed and cannot be collaterally attacked in contempt proceedings. Applying the beyond reasonable doubt standard to contempt, the court found Applicants failed to adduce further evidence to prove identity or conduct, resolved doubts in the Respondents favor, dismissed the application, and awarded GH2000 in costs.
On 30th November, 2018, the Applicants instituted the instant action against the Respondent, one Celestina Osei, for her to be committed to prison for being in contempt of court.
THE CASE OF THE APPLICANTS
It is the case of the Applicants that the Respondent herein is a sibling of theirs.
That per their Exhibits ‘A’ and ‘B’, they caused a writ of summons and statement of claim to be issued against the Respondent herein as the Defendant therein.
That subsequently, proceedings in court culminated in the delivery of judgment in their favour against the Defendant, Respondent herein, as per Exhibit ‘C’. According to the Applicants, the Respondent was served with notice of the entry of judgment, per their Exhibit ‘D’.
The Applicants further state that following the processes of execution, they were put in possession of three (3) rooms of the house, the subject matter in dispute located at Regimanuel estate in Accra, in accordance with the judgment of the court, with the said rooms sealed by the bailiff of the court as per Exhibit ‘E’. The Applicants continue that subsequently, the Respondent herein has gone ahead and broken the seals and taken over the said rooms. That upon their discovery of the Respondent’s conduct, they made a report to the Police, for which the Respondent was invited to the Police Station.
That at the Police Station, the Respondent admitted to her conduct.
It is therefore the contention of the Applicants that the Respondent’s conduct is contemptuous of court for which she should be cited for contempt of court.
THE CASE OF THE RESPONDENT
In her opposition filed on 29th January, 2019, the Respondent who has been hurled before this Court, has stoutly opposed the application.
She states that her name is not Celestina Osei (as stated by the Applicant in the instant action and also in the substantive suit which has engendered the instant action) but rather Celestine Ahiable.
The Respondent continues that she was never served with the processes mentioned in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of the affidavit of the Applicants (the writ of summons and statement of claim, the judgment and entry of judgment). She also denies the conduct alleged by the Applicants.
Although she admits that she was invited to the Police Station on the basis that she refused to allocate some rooms to the Applicants, she denies having admitted to the conduct for which she was invited to the Police Station.
The Respondent counters per paragraph 9 of her affidavit in opposit