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
Justice Nicholas M. C. Abodakpi of the High Court adjudicated a contempt application brought by Commercial Investment Ltd., through its CEO Kelli Cross Kuagbenu Sachiel, against Isaac B. Sackey, Samuel B. Alavanyo, and Emmanuel Borketey. The company alleged respondents violated an order made in SOL/17/13 and related to suit LD/0637/2017, which limited any writ of possession and demolition to land not belonging to Commercial Investment Ltd. The applicant asserted respondents entered its Akatamanso property, demolished foundations, and erected fence walls, relying on photographs and a composite plan. Respondents argued the order’s boundaries were unclear, that a surveyor carved out the applicant’s portion before the writ, and that any works occurred before the order, citing a police report. The court emphasized the Fordjour elements and the beyond reasonable doubt standard. Noting an intervening injunction from the High Court, Tema, and unresolved identity of the land, the court found doubt and dismissed 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