THE REPUBLIC vs DANIEL OFORI & 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
The Applicant initiated legal proceedings against the Respondents for contempt of court after the Respondents failed to obey court orders to remove obstacles blocking access to the Applicant's shop. The Respondents claimed that the Applicant’s lease had expired, and she refused to vacate or pay, leading them to take actions that resulted in contempt charges. The court found that the Applicant successfully established the elements of contempt against the Respondents, who admitted to their actions and expressed regret. The 1st and 2nd Respondents were found liable for contempt and ordered to pay a fine or face imprisonment.
The Applicant on the 14th of November, 2018, mounted this action against the Respondents for an order of this Court to commit the Respondents to prison for contempt of court.
THE CASE OF THE APPLICANT.
The Applicant’s claim is contained in the affidavit in support of the application filed on the 14th of November, 2018, a summation of which is as follows: According to the Applicant, she rented a shop, for the purposes of trading, from the 3rd Respondent, with the 1st and 2nd Respondents at all material times acting as the Managing Director and General Manager respectively of the 3rd Respondent.
It is the case of the Applicant that on 13th of September, 2018, the 3rd Respondent instituted a suit against her in the District Magistrate court in respect of the shop she had rented.
The Applicant attached the Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim of the said suit as Exhibit ‘A’. The Applicant continues that on 15th of September, 2018, she went to the shop to find out that the doors had been welded together and a heap of sand, together with other heavy items, dumped in front of the shop.
That upon inquiring, she was informed that it was the 1st and 2nd Respondents who had perpetuated the acts complained of.
Exhibits ‘B’ and ‘C’ are pictures of the alleged state of the shop on 15th and 18th of September, 2018. The Applicant continues further that on the 16th of October, 2018, the District court was informed of the conduct of the Respondents.
That the court ordered the Respondents to remove the obstacles and grant the Applicant access to the shop by noon the next day, that is, 17th of October, 2018. It is the case of the Applicant that as at the 18th of October, 2018, the Respondents had failed to comply with the order of the court but instead, filed an application to the court to set aside its order.
According to the Applicant, on the 31st of October, 2018, the court dismissed this application and further ordered the Respondents to clear the heap in front of the shop to enable the Applicant access her shop, failing which the Applicant was to clear the sand and surcharge the Respondents with the cost for doing so.
Exhibit‘E’ is a copy of the order of the court made on the 31st of October, 2018. The Applicant says further that on or about the 1st of November 2018, she engaged the services of some persons to clear the heap of sand in front of the shop.
However, the 1st Respondent interrupted this work by causing chaos at the site.
The Applicant states that