AMOAH vs. APPAU ALIAS AMOAH [1977]DLHC1231

Date	1977-03-22
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1977]DLHC1231

OWUSU-ADDO J.

ATTA KESSON FOR THE APPLICANT.

D. DE GRAFT AIDOO FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1977]DLHC1231
																																						<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" >AMOAH <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>APPAU ALIAS AMOAH <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, CAPE COAST]<o:p></o:p>[1977] 2 GLR 159<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:
22 MARCH 1977<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">

ATTA KESSON FOR THE APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>

D. DE GRAFT 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">

OWUSU-ADDO J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF OWUSU-ADDO J.<o:p></o:p>The
respondent has applied for an order to restrain his wife, the petitioner
herein, from staying in the matrimonial home and from interfering in any way
with his person, or invading his freedom or curtailing his liberties and legal
rights.<o:p></o:p>The
petition was filed on 12 March 1976, the wife alleged acts of cruelty against
the husband and disclosed that on 4 February 1968 she and the respondent
contracted a marriage under customary law in Ghana. They later cohabited in Los
Angeles, California, in the United States of America, where they went through a
ceremony of marriage ostensibly to convert their customary law marriage into a
monogamous marriage, but in reality, that ceremony constituted a mere church
blessing of their customary marriage and nothing more. So in point of fact, at
the time of the presentation of the petition, the parties were married under
customary law.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Turning
to the present application, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that
the parties being married under customary law, the applicable law is therefore
customary law and not the Matrimonial Causes Act, 1971 (Act 367). Referring to
section 41 (2) (b) of the said Act, counsel urged that the personal law of the
parties, namely, customary law, overrides the provisions of the aforementioned
Act. He contended that as far as his research goes, there is no rule of
customary law which enjoins a husband to provide accommodation for a wife
pending divorce proceedings.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
respondent, by his affidavit deposed to the following facts:<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">“(5) That
the petitioner is still living under the same roof with me in spite of her
petition and that she leaves the house any time she pleases and stays away for
days without my knowledge. <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">(6) That
the presence of the petitioner in my house is a source of constant
embarrassment to me. <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">(7) That the
petitioner is also in the habit of teasing me and casting insinuations
calculated to annoy me. <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">(8) That
the petitioner has been interfering with my liberties and that although I have
sought several times to advise her to leave my house peacefully the petitioner
has threatened not to leave until I kill her.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
petitioner, by her affidavit in opposition, denied that she did any of the
things that were alleged against her and deposed in paragraphs (3) and (4) as
follows:<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">“(3) That
true as it is that I am still living under the same roof as the petitioner
because it is my legal and matrimonial home, I do so largely because I do not
earn enough to be able to hire a bungalow where I can live and maintain the
standard of living commensurate with my status and the style to which the
respondent has introduced me to over the last ten years or so. <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">(4) That
the petitioner </main>