AKORNINGA vs. AKAWAGRE [1988]DLCA694

Date	1988-06-23
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1988]DLCA694

TAYLOR J.S.C

OSEI-HWERE JA

LAMPTEY J.A.

[1988]DLCA694
																																						<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" >AKORNINGA<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;vs. <o:p></o:p>AKAWAGRE <o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1987-88] 2 GLR 562<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
23 JUNE 1988<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">

ALOKORE FOR THE APPELLANT. <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">

TAYLOR J.S.C., OSEI-HWERE AND LAMPTEY
JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF TAYLOR J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>The claim
of the plaintiff-respondent against the defendant-appellant is “for the
enforcement of an arbitration award for the return of his wife and two
children” and “¢5,000 general damages.” The defendant-appellant is the father
of the alleged wife and the respondent is a brother of her late husband.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
appellant’s daughter got married to one Agambire Atedoku who was said to be the
brother of the whole blood of the respondent in this case. After the marriage
the said Agambire Atedoku died, but at the time of his death his wife, the
woman claimed in these proceedings, was pregnant and eight months after her
husband’s death she gave birth to a baby boy. This boy is one of two children
claimed in the suit by the respondent. In evidence the lady explained that
after her husband’s death, his family were not feeding her and she had to
return to her father’s house and only went back to her husbands house to
deliver; she said after she had delivered, her husband’s family were still not
looking after her so she returned to her father with her baby and stayed with
her father for almost six years. The respondent’s family completely ignored her
and her child for the whole period. Her unchallenged evidence is that she does
not know the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>At the
end of the six years, she left for Kumasi and with her father’s consent,
married one Atanga Acheribe with whom she had a child. This child, five years
old at the commencement of the proceedings, is the second child claimed by the
respondent. So when the suit was commenced the respondent as the plaintiff
claimed his dead brother’s wife as his wife and the two sons, eleven and five
years old, respectively as belonging to him under Frafra customary law. He
first lodged a complaint against the appellant at the chief of Yorugo’s palace
and it was there decided that the lady and the two children should be brought
to the chiefs house, presumably to be handed over to the respondent, but the
appellant did not comply with this decision. He agreed to return the eleven
year old boy provided the respondent compensated him for the eleven years he
had looked after the child. The woman and the said five year-old child were not
with him; they were with the new husband and he was in the circumstances in no
position to comply with the decision that he should in effect surrender them.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>At the
circuit court however the learned judge his Honour Judge Adjovie held against
the appellant 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">“I find
him . . . liable for the return of his daughter and all the two children to the
plaintiff. This was exactly what was found against him at the arbitration
before the Yorugo chief. He himself does not deny it for he admitted in
cross-examination 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">‘Q. The
Yorugo chief after hearing from the plaintiff and his witnesses and from you
and your witnesses told you that you are to return the woman and the two
children to the plaintiff. <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">A. the
Yorugo chief said so, but I said it cannot be so,’ I am completely satisfied
with this finding against him and agree that it ought to be enforced against
him. I so order accordingly. And having regard to the defendant’s unreasonable
conduct, I allow ¢3,000 punitive damages against him. For costs I allow ¢600.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>