GYAN ALIAS AMOAH AND ANOTHER vs. DABRAH [1974]DLHC2281

Date	1974-10-18
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1974]DLHC2281

EDWARD WIREDU J.

AMUA SEKYI FOR THE APPELLANTS.

NO APPEARANCE BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.

[1974]DLHC2281
																																						<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" ><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom: 5pt; text-align: center; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;"><span lang="en-GH" style="font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:Helvetica;color:#00B0F0;mso-fareast-language:#0C00">GYAN
ALIAS AMOAH AND ANOTHER<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom: 5pt; text-align: center; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;"><span lang="en-GH" style="font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:Helvetica;color:#00B0F0;mso-fareast-language:#0C00">vs.<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom: 5pt; text-align: center; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;"><span lang="en-GH" style="font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:Helvetica;color:#00B0F0;mso-fareast-language:#0C00">DABRAH<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom: 5pt; text-align: center; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[HIGH COURT, CAPE COAST]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom: 1.5pt solid windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom: 5pt; text-align: center; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; border: none; padding: 0cm;">[1974] 2 GLR 318&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;DATE:<span lang="en-GH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;color:#00B0F0;mso-fareast-language:#0C00">&nbsp;18 OCTOBER 1974.<o:p></o:p>

</div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 7.5pt; line-height: 15.55pt; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp;<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 7.5pt; text-align: justify; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">AMUA SEKYI FOR THE
APPELLANTS.<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom: 1.5pt solid windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 7.5pt; text-align: justify; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; border: none; padding: 0cm;">NO APPEARANCE BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 6pt; text-align: justify; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; border: none; padding: 0cm;">EDWARD WIREDU J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 5pt; text-align: justify; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">JUDGMENT
OF EDWARD WIREDU J.<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 5pt; text-align: justify; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">This appeal raises for
consideration (a) the extent to which the customary law notion of a father’s
responsibility for the immoral conduct of his son in our present day society is
recognised, (b) whether there exists any justification for modifying this
notion to meet present day social and economic changes in the society, (c) what
acts constitute actionable seduction under customary law and (d) whether it is
competent for a court to disbelieve evidence which has not been challenged in
cross-examination and if so under what circumstances.<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 5pt; text-align: justify; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">&nbsp;<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 5pt; text-align: justify; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">The present appeal is from
the decision of the District Court Grade II, Assin Manso, dated 4 September
1973, which upheld a claim for damages by the plaintiff-respondent (hereafter
referred to simply as the plaintiff) against the defendants-appellants
(hereafter also referred to as the defendants) in a seduction action.<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 5pt; text-align: justify; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">&nbsp;<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 5pt; text-align: justify; line-height: normal; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">The facts upon which the
plaintiff’s action was founded are briefly nutshelled in his claim as follows:<o:p></o:p>