ASANTE vs. WIREDU [1975]DLHC3067

Date	1975-11-11
Suit No.	[1976] 1 GLR 100
Citation No.	[1975]DLHC3067

APATU-PLANGE AG.J.

OKYERE DARKO FOR THE APPELLANT.

OBENG FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1975]DLHC3067
																																						<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" >ASANTE<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>WIREDU<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT, KOFORIDUA]<o:p></o:p>[1976] 1 GLR 100&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; &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: 11
NOVEMBER 1975<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>OKYERE
DARKO FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>OBENG FOR
THE RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

</div>JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT OF APATU-PLANGE AG. J.<o:p></o:p>This is
an appeal by the plaintiff from the judgment of the District Court Grade I,
Nkawkaw, in which the learned trial magistrate dismissed the plaintiff’s claim
for damages for defamation against the defendant and upheld the defendant’s
counterclaim for damages for seduction against the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>The facts
of this case are briefly as follows: The plaintiff is a pharmacist residing at
Abetifi where he runs a clinic. The defendant is a taxi driver also resident in
Abetifi. The defendant has a wife by name Akua Tutuaa who together with her
children used to visit the plaintiff’s clinic whenever they were in need of
medical treatment. The plaintiff knew the said Akua Tutuaa to be the wife of
the defendant. The plaintiff and the defendant were quite friendly and this was
also to the knowledge of the defendant’s wife.<o:p></o:p>One
Tuesday morning the said Akua Tutuaa suddenly approached her husband, the
defendant, and confessed to him that the plaintiff used to have sexual
intercourse with her whenever she visited his clinic for treatment. Obviously
this was a piece of news that was bound to shock any husband and the defendant
went and confronted the plaintiff with it. According to the defendant, the
plaintiff begged him and promised to come and see him, and asked that he, the
defendant, should not let anyone know about it. The plaintiff however denied
that he ever begged the defendant. However, the defendant went and informed the
Omanhene of Kwahu, the Asabrakahene and one Yaw Torso, a native herbalist, that
the plaintiff had seduced his wife. The plaintiff on learning of this
instituted an action for defamation against the defendant; and according to the
defendant, in view of the plaintiff’s admission to him that he had had sexual
intercourse with his wife, he also counterclaim against the plaintiff for
seducing his wife. The trial magistrate found it proved that the plaintiff had
in fact had sexual intercourse with the defendant’s wife and therefore
dismissed the plaintiff’s claim and upheld the defendant’s counterclaim.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff claiming to be aggrieved by that judgment appeals to this court on
three grounds namely:<o:p></o:p>1. The
judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s claim is against the weight of evidence.<o:p></o:p>2. The
learned magistrate misdirected himself on the issue of defamation.<o:p></o:p>3. The
learned magistrate erred in law in upholding the counterclaim of the defendant
and in giving judgment for the defendant on the counterclaim.<o:p></o:p>Now as
regards the first ground of appeal, counsel for the appellant submitted that
what influenced the learned magistrate in dismissing the plaintiff’s claim was
that there was no publication. I am unable to agree with this submission, for
the learned magistra</main>