BAUGE vs. ATTORNEY-GENERAL [1975]DLHC367

Date	1975-12-19
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1975]DLHC367

SARKODEE J.

FORSON FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

V. Y. AGUDETSE STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE DEFENDANT.

[1975]DLHC367
																																						<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" >BAUGE<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;vs. <o:p></o:p>ATTORNEY-GENERAL<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH
COURT, SEKONDI]<o:p></o:p>[1976] 2 GLR 165<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:
19 DECEMBER 1975.<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">

FORSON FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<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
plaintiff’s claim is for the return of 330 cartons of Passport whisky which
were seized by customs officers and the refund of the sum of ¢5,500.00 which
was exacted from the plaintiff by way of penalty in respect of the plaintiffs
vessel M.V. Roly.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiff was the master of the M.V. Roly. On 9 July 1975 the ship arrived at
Takoradi and on 10 July his agents, who lived in Takoradi, called the Roly
Fishing Co., Ltd. submitted a manifest on behalf of the plaintiff informing the
Comptroller of Customs and Excise that their ship the M.V. Roly had frozen fish
on board for discharge at the port of Takoradi.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiff applied for and, in accordance with practice, was granted permission
to discharge the frozen fish before preparing the necessary customs duty entry
on the goods. Later the plaintiff paid the customs duties. Before granting the
permit customs officers had entered the ship where they were shown the only
compartment in the ship which contained the fish and which weighed 365.3 cwts.
and was made up of 930 cartons. The ship itself was 40.00 tons; that is less
than 250 tons burden.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>However,
five days after the M.V. Roly had come into port customs officers upon
information, searched her and found a large quantity of Passport whisky in
another part of the same hatch into which the customs officers had been taken
earlier. When they entered the ship the second time, they told the master that
they were on board to search the ship. The master obliged and led them to the
same hatch from where the fish had been off-loaded, apparently to show that
that was the only hatch on the vessel. They found it empty. But Captain Nuamah,
the military officer then in charge of the Customs, Trade and Immigration who
led the team of customs officers, saw a partition and therefore came out of the
hatch and by another opening on the floor of the ship and on which a crew member
was sitting was able to reach another compartment where he found the whisky.
The man who was sitting on the entrance refused to get up when requested by the
captain until after persistent demand he obliged. It was the military officer
himself who opened that entrance. He then informed the plaintiff that he had
failed to report to customs officers within 24 hours of his arrival in Ghana
that he had that quantity of whisky on board and that he had contravened
customs regulations. The plaintiff’s answer was that he did not intend to
discharge the whisky in Ghana and therefore had not offended against the laws
of Ghana. Captain Nuamah ordered his men to take the whisky out. That was done
and in the presence of the plaintiff, they counted 325 cartons and three single
bottles. The plaintiff there and then said he had more than that quantity on
board.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
customs officers took the whisky to a customs warehouse and then told the
plaintiff to report at the offices of the Customs and Excise the next day for
further investigations. Subsequently, a fine of ¢5,500.00 was imposed which the
plaintiff paid. A notice of seizure was also served on him. Within 30 days of
the service of the notice, 18 July, the plaintiff, through his solicitor,
served a written notice of his claim on the Comptroller of Customs and Excise
and later filed additional claims. The claims were not tendered and no evidence
was led to substantiate them. However, on 12 September, the plaintiff issued a
writ to commence this suit.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiff says that the seizure of the whisky was unlawful and secondly, that
the penalty was illegally exacted from him. The defendant contends that the
penalty was imposed in accordance with section 70 of the Customs and Excise
Decree, 1972 (N.R.</main>