HUGHES vs. HUGHES [1975]DLHC2383

Date	1975-06-29
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1975]DLHC2383

SARKODEE J.

E. B. O. ANDERSON FOR THE PETITIONER.

MESSRS. QUIST BROWN & AIDOO FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1975]DLHC2383
																																						<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" >HUGHES <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>HUGHES <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT,
ACCRA]<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;[1973]
2 GLR 342<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

DATE:
29 JUNE 1973.<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">

E. B. O. ANDERSON FOR THE PETITIONER.<o:p></o:p>

MESSRS. QUIST, BROWN &amp; AIDOO 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">

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

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF SARKODEE J.<o:p></o:p>The
petitioner, husband, seeks dissolution of his marriage with the respondent on
the sole ground that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation. He
says that the respondent has deserted him; that she has behaved in such a way
that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with her; that the
spouses after diligent efforts have been unable to reconcile their differences.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
parties were married at the St. Stephens Church, Hampstead, London, England, on
30 March 1957. They lived and cohabited in London and later in Accra. There are
two children of the marriage, Augustus aged fifteen years and Horatio aged
fourteen years.<o:p></o:p>For the
conduct of the respondent to amount to desertion the court must be satisfied
that it is an unjustifiable withdrawal from cohabitation without the consent of
the petitioner and that she has the intention of remaining separated
permanently from him. The petitioner says that the respondent’s leaving him was
without just cause. It is not denied that the respondent is separated from her
husband but mere separation is not enough. It must be shown to be without the
consent of the other spouse. When the petitioner, the respondent and their two
sons returned to Ghana from the United Kingdom they had no place of their own
to live. They lived at Avenida Hotel for some time. The wife’s father paid the
bills. She later found a house at Tesano at a rent of ¢80.00 a month. He said
it was expensive and so they left after staying there for two months. Here
again the respondent’s father paid the rents. Subsequently a friend of the
wife’s father gave them a house in which they lived rent free. All this time
the husband was unemployed. In January 1967 he got a job at the Ghana
Broadcasting Corporation as an engineer. Even though he was entitled to a
bungalow one was not immediately available and his name was put on the waiting
list. In March 1967 the wife got a job at the Agogo Hospital as a matron. Prior
to this she was a nursing sister at the Adabraka Polyclinic. The husband said
he objected to her taking the job at Agogo because he felt that would separate
them. He said despite his protest she accepted it and without his consent. The
respondent on her part says that they were facing financial difficulties. They
had nowhere to live and so when she saw a job going at Agogo the petitioner
advised her to take it. In any event after the wife had taken up the job he
visited her at least twice every month. She in turn visited him in Accra and
she did so whenever he was not going to Agogo. She says that the petitioner
very often had no money on him when he visited her at Agogo and so with her
knowledge he took various sums from the hospital secretary on her account. At
times she gave him money herself.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>They
continued to exchange visits until about November 1969 when he cut off his
visits to her, because according to him, when he visited her he got a poor
reception; she made unkind remarks about how he dressed and about his financial
position. He said it became difficult for him to go near her. The respondent
denied she ever made those remarks; but even if she made them I find it
difficult to see how they should cause the petitioner to stay away. There is no
evidence that they were persistent.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The legal
burden is on the husband, as the petitioner, to prove that his wife deserted
him without cause. He says that anytime he went to Agogo he invited her to
return to him but she refused. The petitioner himself had nowhere to live. The
financial position of the parties was such that she had to find a better paid
job. Even if there was desertion it started from November 1969 and not earlier.
It is true that since that time the petitioner and the respondent have not
lived as man and wife but there is no satisfactory proof that this was because
the respondent refused to return to him.<o:p></o:p>