ADDAE vs. ASANTE [1971]DLHC2245

Date	1971-01-28
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1971]DLHC2245

EDUSEI J.

K. E. AMUA SEKYI FOR THE APPELLANT.

S. ADUBOFUOR FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1971]DLHC2245
																																						<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" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">ADDAE <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">vs. <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">ASANTE <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT,
SEKONDI]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1974] 2 GLR 288<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:
28 JANUARY 1971.<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">

K. E. AMUA
SEKYI FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

S.
ADUBOFUOR 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">

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

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGEMENT OF EDUSEI J.<o:p></o:p>This is
an appeal against the judgment of the District Court Grade II, Bibiani,
presided over by his worship Mr. G. K. Quaye, district magistrate grade II.<o:p></o:p>The
defendant’s case was that the plaintiff’s son, John Addae, had sexual
intercourse with the defendant’s sister, and a child was born. The plaintiff’s
son, by a letter addressed to his father, denied responsibility for the
pregnancy, for he said he could not be the father of the child having regard to
the time he had sexual intercourse with the sister of the defendant.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
defendant referred the matter to an arbitration at which the plaintiff’s first
witness, Nana Adomako Ansah, was the president. There were six other members of
the arbitration. The subject-matter of the arbitration was that the defendant
was claiming certain sums of money from the plaintiff because his son John
Addae had put the defendant’s sister in a family way. The arbitrators went into
the matter and decided against the defendant and asked him to pay N¢20.10 to
the plaintiff which in the nature of things amounted to costs of the
arbitration proceedings.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiff instituted this action to claim this amount, and at the trial both
parties were represented by counsel. It turned out that the whole issue depended
on whether there was an arbitration or negotiations for a settlement. The trial
court decided that there was an arbitration but went on to say that the
arbitrators’ decision was not based on the merits of the case and therefore it
was not an arbitration and he proceeded to set it aside.<o:p></o:p>The
evidence which the trial magistrate accepted shows that both parties gave
evidence and called witnesses in support of their respective claims before the
arbitration. This is what the magistrate said: “From the evidence of the
plaintiff’s first witness and what I have on record I have come to the
conclusion that the proceedings were an arbitration and not a negotiation for a
settlement.” It does seem that the magistrate later on in his judgment
proceeded to say that the decision was not based on the merits and therefore no
arbitration took place. It is clear from his judgment that he did not consider
the reasons given by the arbitrators as legally sound for their decision; the
reasons being that:<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">(a) both
parties were living in the same village and yet when the defendant’s sister
gave birth to a child the plaintiff was not informed for some eight months
after the event by the defendant; and<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">&nbsp;(b) that the defendant named the child and if
he knew that it was the child of the plaintiff’s son the defendant would have
informed the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Without
any hesitation, I can only say that the magistrate was wrong, for he was not
sitting on appeal over the matter. The contention that the arbitration award
cannot be justified by the evidence or even if it is mistaken in law is not a
ground for setting aside the award. This principle was made clear in the case
of Foli v. Akese (1930) 1 W.A.C.A. 1 where the West African Court of Appeal
held that the ground that an award is mistaken in law or not justified by the
evidence is not a ground which can be urged as a reaso</main>