THE REPUBLIC VS ISAAC B. SACKEY & ORS
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE NICHOLAS M.C. ABODAKPI J.
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves a motion for civil contempt filed by Kelli Cross Kuagbenu Sachiel against Isaac B. Sackey, Samuel B. Alavanyo, and Emmanuel Borketey. The applicant asserted that the respondents disobeyed a court order concerning disputed land. The respondents filed affidavits in opposition, questioning the clarity and boundaries of the court order and presenting evidence that the alleged acts occurred before the writ of possession was granted. The court evaluated the evidence and determined that the applicant failed to prove the contempt claims beyond a reasonable doubt, resulting in the dismissal of the application.
A) BACKGROUND
(1) This motion was filed on 21/03/2018 and the respondents are: ISAAC B. SACKEY SAMUEL B. ALAVANYO and EMMANUEL BORKETEY The applicant – ‘Kelli – Cross Kuagbenu Sachiel’ in an affidavit in support described himself as C. E. O. of the applicant/company.
The complaints or grievances that provoked this action are about, acts and conducts carried out in contravention of a Court order.
There is also a supplementary affidavit in support, with annexure.
There are exhibits annexed.
B) THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF CONTEMPT Contempt of Court has been differently defined by many authors and jurists and it appears the peculiar facts of each case explains what in law will constitute contempt.
In Osborn’s concise law Dictionary (by John Burke) it is defined as: “Failure to comply with an order of a superior court, …or an act of resistance or insult to the court or the judge.
Conduct likely to prejudice the fair trial of an accused person punishable by fine or committal to prison. ”The definition of contempt as found in Oswald’s contempt of court, also provides a different perspective to what contempt is, it states: “To speak generally, contempt of court may be said to be constituted by any conduct that tends to bring the Authority and administration of the law into disrespect or disregard or to interfere with or prejudice parties, litigants or their witnesses during the litigation. ”Besides, these definitions another characteristic of contempt application and proceedings is that, technically, an applicant in the proceedings is permitted by law to use the name of the REPUBLIC, to prosecute what he has complained about, in the name of the public and also to uphold the integrity of the law and the administration of justice.
I refer to the case: EFFIDUASE STOOL AFFAIRS (No. 3)REPUBLIC VRS NUMAPAU AND ORS.
EX PARTE, AMEYAW II (NO. 3) [2001] SCGLR 59. The applicant carries the burden of proof, and because contempt is a quasi- criminal charge, the standard of proof is, proof beyond reasonable doubt, as provided in Section 13 of the evidence Act, 1975 [NRCD 323]. Whether the application is classified as civil or criminal type of contempt, the standard of proof is the same.
However, the distinction between the two is that, civil contempt is constituted by an act or omission which amount to Disobedience of an order or process of a court in a CIVIL C