THE REPUBLIC vs. DR. KWAME DUFFOUR EX-PARTE: NICHOLAS EDWARD ASARE [2008]DLSC2471

Date	2008-03-05
Suit No.	CIVIL MOTION NO. J8/13/2008
Citation No.	[2008]DLSC2471

ATUGUBA J.S.C. (PRESIDING)

DR. DATE-BAH J.S.C.

ANSAH J.S.C.

ADINYIRA (MRS) J.S.C.

S. K. ASIAMAH J.S.C.

MR. KWAME GYAN FOR APPLICANT

THADEUS SORY FOR RESPONDENT.

[2008]DLSC2471
																																						<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" >THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>DR. KWAME DUFFOUR EX-PARTE: NICHOLAS EDWARD ASARE<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME
COURT]<o:p></o:p>CIVIL
MOTION NO. J8/13/2008<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: 5TH MARCH, 2008.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR.
KWAME GYAN FOR APPLICANT<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">

THADEUS
SORY FOR RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <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">

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>R U L I N G<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;ATUGUBA, J.S.C.:<o:p></o:p>This
is an application for committal, for contempt of this court, allegedly
committed by the respondent, Dr. Kwame Duffour.&nbsp;
The grounds for the application are mainly contained in paragraphs 2, 4
and 5 of the applicant’s supporting affidavit.&nbsp;
They are as follows:<o:p></o:p>“2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That on 7th June 2006, this Honourable
Court gave a unanimous judgment in Civil Appeal, No. J4/25/2005 entitled:<o:p></o:p>Nicholas Bernard Asare&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Plaintiff/Applicant/Respondent<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; Vrs<o:p></o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Dupaul Wood Treatment Co. (Ghana) Ltd<o:p></o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Dr. Kwame Duffour&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Defendants/Respondents/Applicants<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;X&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; X&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; X<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>4.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That in its said judgment (page 26)
this Court, after a very careful and exhaustive examination of the evidence
made 3 declarations, namely:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;1. a declaration that the respondent is a
shareholder and a member of the first appellant and holds 50% of its issued
share capital;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;2. a declaration that the new regulations
adopted on 1st May 1980 were never registered with the Registrar General’s
Department and are therefore void and of no effect;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;3. a declaration that the purported removal of
the respondent as a director was unlawful and so void.<o:p></o:p>5.
That this Honourable Court further confirmed two (2) other orders made by the
Court of Appeal i.e.<o:p></o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
“That the applicant’s name be entered in the Register of Members of the
first Respondent Company (ie. The Appellant company before this court) pursuant
to section 35 of the Companies Code 1963 (Act 179).<o:p></o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That the Applicant be paid all the directors’ fees and allowances which
were discontinued as a result of his purported removal as a director of the
company”.<o:p></o:p>There
is no doubt that this court has power to commit for contempt to itself.&nbsp; That is a power possessed at common law by a
superior court, see Asumadu-Sakyi II v. Owusu (1981) GLR 398 C.A.&nbsp; That power ahs been retained by article
126(2) of the 1992 Constitution which provides as follows:-<o:p></o:p>“The Superior Courts shall be superior
courts of record and shall have the power to commit for contempt to themselves
and all such powers as were vested in a court of record immediately before the
coming into force of this Constitution”.<o:p></o:p>The
question that arises on this application is whether this court has jurisdiction
to entertain the same.<o:p></o:p>The
Declaratory Reliefs.<o:p></o:p>First
the declaratory reliefs.&nbsp; Declaratory
orders declare the rights of the parties but do not order anything to be done
by them.&nbsp; They are&nbsp; therefore not enforceable.&nbsp; It has been held by this court that where the
declarations are made by a customary tribunal they are enforceable inasmuch as
at customary law decisions are rendered in declaratory terms.&nbsp; This would have required closer scrutin</main>