Republic Vrs Aworinde and Others [2022] GHAHC 39 (13 December 2022)

Republic Vrs Aworinde and Others [2022] GHAHC 39 (13 December 2022)

The Applicant proved beyond reasonable doubt that the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Respondents obstructed him in his duties as executor, amounting to contempt of court. The 4th Respondent, being a tenant, was not found culpable.

Citation
[2022] GHAHC 39
Parties
Applicant: Ekow Wilson; 1st Respondent: Patricia Aworinde; 2nd Respondent: Florence Acheampong; 3rd Respondent: Juliana Acheampong; 4th Respondent: Rockson Sackey
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
13 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Contempt of Court Application / Judgment
Outcome
1st, 2nd, and 3rd Respondents convicted of contempt; 4th Respondent acquitted and discharged.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Probate, Estate Administration
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Probate and Administration Contempt of Court Probate Estate Administration

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ekow Wilson

Applicant

Patricia Aworinde

1st Respondent

Florence Acheampong

2nd Respondent

Juliana Acheampong

3rd Respondent

Rockson Sackey

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt of Court Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondents obstructed the Applicant in the execution of his duties as executor of the estate
  2. 2 Whether the Respondents' conduct amounted to contempt of court

Ratio Decidendi

The Applicant proved beyond reasonable doubt that the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Respondents obstructed him in his duties as executor, amounting to contempt of court. The 4th Respondent, being a tenant, was not found culpable.

Court Disposition

1st, 2nd, and 3rd Respondents convicted of contempt; 4th Respondent acquitted and discharged.

Orders

  • 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Respondents each fined 250 penalty units or in default, one month imprisonment in hard labour
  • 4th Respondent acquitted and discharged