Republic Vrs, Drah Ex Parte Wugah (C13/09/2024) [2023] GHAHC 669 (22 December 2023)

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (COURT 1) HO HELD THIS FRIDAY 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023, BEFORE JUSTICE JOHN EKOW MENSAH, J. SUIT NO. C13/09/2024 IN THE MATTER OF CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS: CAROLINE WUGAH OF MEFI-NUKPORTE VERSUS ATSUNORVI DZAH OF MAFI-NUKPORTE AND THE REPUBLIC VERSUS ATSUNORVI DZAH EX-PARTE: CAROLINE WUGAH RULING : : : : PLAINTIFF/J/CREDITOR DEFENDANT/J/DEBTOR RESPONDENT APPLICANT Counsel for the Applicant has filed motion on notice for committal for contempt under Order 50 of CI47. In his affidavit in support Applicant says she obtained judgment in a defamation matter at the District Court, Adidome on 4/4/2023. A copy of the said judgement is attached to the motion as Exhibit A. In fact, Applicant in paragraph 4 of the affidavit in support has stated: “4 That the respondent was by the order contained in Exhibit A supra to pay me an amount of GH¢20,000.00 on or before 4/7/2023 but which he has failed to do up to date without any excuses being damages for defamation against me” Applicant says the respondent must be severely punished to serve as deterrent to other like-minded people. Respondent is opposed to the motion and has filed her affidavit in opposition. In the main the respondent identifies Applicant’s procedure in retrieving the judgment as wrong and sins against the High Court Civil Procedure Rules CI 47. In particular the respondent states in paragraph 7 of his affidavit in opposition thus: “That as alluded to in paragraph 11 of affidavit in support, plaintiff’s application could have come under Order 43 rule 1 (1) of CI 47 and not this back door tactics to have me unjustifiably incarcerated for supposedly holding the Honourable Court in contempt”. From the facts of the case as gleaned from the respective affidavits in support and the affidavit in opposition, it is an undeniable fact that plaintiff/applicant obtained a judgment against the respondent in a defamation suit at the District Court, Adidome on 4/4/2023. In her judgement the learned District Magistrate made the following Orders: “that the defendant to settle in plaintiff’s favour an amount of Twenty Thousand Ghana Cedis (GH¢20,000.00) for defaming her. This should be done on or before the 4th of July, 2023. 2. The defendant is also restrained from defaming the plaintiff with such words which will ridicule, defame her in the vicinity. 3. I award costs of Two Thousand Ghana Cedis (GH¢2,000.00) against the defendant”. It is the first Order of the District Court that the Applicant is praying the court to cite the respondent for contempt of Court for failing to pay up the stated amount to the Applicant within the stated time. In the famous case of the Republic V. High Court, Accra Ex-Parte Laryea Mensah [1998-99] SCGLR. The SC stated at page 368 of the Report thus: “By definition, a person commits contempt and may be committed to prison for willfully disobeying an order of court requiring to do any act other than the payment or to abstain from doing some act, and the order sought to be enforced should be unambiguous and must be clearly understood by the parties concerned”. Applying this definition to the present motion praying the court to convict the respondent for contempt, the law will render the present application as incompetent before the court. It is in no doubt that respondent has refused/failed to pay the amount to the Applicant as ordered by the District Court. But per the definition of contempt as referred to supra, Respondent’s failure to pay the money cannot dovetail into what constitutes contempt of court. I have reproduced paragraph 7 of Respondent’s affidavit in opposition which states the procedure the Applicant should have adopted in securing his judgment money from the respondent. Besides, classifying this motion as being incompetent, this court will also fault the procedure adopted by Applicant in enforcing the payment of the judgment debt by the respondent. In the circumstances, the court will dismiss the Applicant’s motion for being incompetent before the court. Cost of GH¢5,000.00 is awarded the Respondent. (SGD.) JOHN EKOW MENSAH, J. (JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT) Lawyers: Emile Atsu Agbakpe Esq. Counsel for the Respondents. T. K. T. Godwin Kporble Counsel for The Applicant. td* 4