AGGREY vs. AGGREY AND ANOTHER [1966]DLSC1641

Date	1966-11-07
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1966]DLSC1641

ARCHER J.

I. K. ABBAN FOR THE PETITIONER.

T. D. BRODIE-MENDS FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1966]DLSC1641
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" >AGGREY<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;vs. <o:p></o:p>AGGREY AND ANOTHER <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, CAPE COAST]<o:p></o:p>[1966] GLR 726<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DATE:
7 NOVEMBER 1966.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

I. K. ABBAN FOR THE PETITIONER.<o:p></o:p>

T. D. BRODIE-MENDS FOR THE RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

ARCHER J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ARCHER J.<o:p></o:p>The
petitioner seeks dissolution of the marriage between herself and the respondent
on the ground of the respondent’s adultery with one Adjowa Kwaboa. The
respondent, in his reply and also at the trial, prayed that the marriage should
be dissolved and a decree granted in his favour on the ground that the
petitioner’s conduct was conducive to the said adultery which the respondent
has admitted.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
parties were married on 29 December 1956 and lived in the matrimonial home at
Yamoransa, near Cape Coast in the Central Region of Ghana. At the time of the
marriage the petitioner was an assistant mass education officer, stationed at
Kumasi. Shortly after the marriage she resigned her job at the request of the
respondent and lived with the respondent at Yamoransa. The respondent owned the
matrimonial home at Yamoransa and kept a store. The petitioner also had a
passbook with Messrs. S.C.O.A. and with the passbook acquired good business and
earned profit, it was suggested that the respondent’s store should be converted
into a commission store as a prelude to further expansion of the business. This
was done after the petitioner had provided the necessary security. Later the
petitioner was employed as a matron at the then Teachers Training College at
Cape Coast and remained for some time unemployed when the Training College was
temporarily closed down. Subsequently, she regained her employment as matron in
the same institution now converted into the University College of Cape Coast.
She is still employed there.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
respondent, early in 1964 found that his business as a mineral manufacturer had
collapsed owing to scarcity of essential chemicals and the impossibility of
obtaining import licences to purchase these chemicals from abroad. While at
Yamoransa he had a farm at Anyan-Denkyira, his home town, and he therefore
decided to transfer his abode from Yamoransa to Anyan-Denkyira and to
concentrate on his farming. He also took up a job as a teacher with the
Methodist School at Anyan-Denkyira. On the last of three visits which she paid
the respondent at Anyan-Denkyira, the petitioner discovered that the respondent
had become a father of a son born by one Adwoa Kwaboa, the co-respondent. The
respondent admitted that he was the father. However, he maintained during the
trial that the petitioner’s conduct towards him was conducive to the commission
of the said adultery. The conduct complained of consisted of the petitioner’s
refusal to join the respondent at Anyan-Denkyira to perform housewifely duties
in consonance with her matrimonial vows and obligations. It was the opinion of
the respondent that the petitioner considered the money she earned from her
employment of greater importance than the attention and affection which she
should have displayed towards him. Moreover, on one occasion, when the
petitioner visited Anyan-Denkyira, the respondent was sick in bed but the
petitioner did not minister to his needs to ensure his recovery and eventual
segregation from the sick bed. Moreover, for nearly seven months the petitioner
did not visit him at Anyan-Denkyira thus depriving him of the conjugal solace,
succour, comfort and consortium and sexual satisfaction which all virile
husbands expect from their wives. The respondent explained the circumstances
leading to the commission of the adultery with the co-respondent in the
following words:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“I had no
responsible person there to care for me. I had to cook for the labourers on the
farm as there was no woman with me. Where a person has no wife, he has to cook
for the labourers. For about seven months, she had not come. So it became
necessary that I should have somebody to care for me. I got the woman cited to
assist me. I have a son a year old with the woman cited.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
petitioner has refuted the charge that her conduct was conducive to the
commission of the said adultery. Immediately she discovered the adultery, she
questioned the respondent who simply exclaimed, “Ah well! And so what?” There
is no doubt that the petitioner’s hours of duty as a matron involved early
home-departure and late home-coming. The respondent himself has admitted that
when they were at Yamoransa he used to query the petitioner whenever she got
home late. She explained and he, the respondent, accepted her explanation. Even
when she did not return to Yamoransa for the night he excused her because her father
had a house in Cape Coast and it was safe to assume that she slept in the
father’s house at Cape Coast. The respondent never indicated throughout his
evidence that it was possible for the petitioner to cohabit with him at
Anyan-Denkyira and at the same time attend work at the University College of
Cape Coast. It seems to me that daily cohabitation </main>