THE REPUBLIC vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR EXPARTE: JOANA EWURABENA OCRAN [2020]DLCA10068

Date	2020-05-28
Suit No.	SUIT NO. H1/103/2019
Citation No.	[2020]DLCA10068

VICTOR D. OFOE JA (PRESIDING)

CECILA HANZZY SOWAH JA

P. BRIGHT MENSAH JA

F. K. YEBOAH FOR THE APPLICANT/APPELLANT

FRANK ASAMOAH FOR THE RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

[2020]DLCA10068
																																						<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>MANAGING DIRECTOR<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>EXPARTE: JOANA EWURABENA OCRAN<o:p></o:p>(APPLICANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION), ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

SUIT NO.&nbsp;&nbsp; H1/103/2019&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:
28TH MAY&nbsp; 2020<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>F. K.
YEBOAH FOR THE APPLICANT/APPELLANT<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

FRANK
ASAMOAH FOR THE RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<o:p></o:p>VICTOR D.
OFOE JA (PRESIDING), CECILA HANZZY SOWAH JA, P. BRIGHT MENSAH JA<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%;
border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;MENSAH, JA<o:p></o:p>On the 26th
day of March 2018, the Financial &amp; Economic Crime Division of the Accra
High Court presided over by Georgina Mensah-Datsa J, (as she then was)
dismissed the contempt application brought before it by the Applicant/Appellant
herein, against the Respondent/Respondent herein. &nbsp;It is against the ruling of the court that
this instant appeal has been launched.&nbsp; The
only ground of appeal is that the Ruling is against the weight of
evidence.&nbsp; The notice of appeal appears
on p. 23 of the record of appeal
whilst the Ruling complained of, appears on pp 21-22 of the record of appeal. &nbsp;I shall simply refer to the applicant/appellant
as the “appellant” and the Respondent/Respondent as the “contemnor/respondent”.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Facts:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>It is
common ground that the Accra High Court differently constituted gave judgment
in or about 2015 in favour of the Appellant in a case in which she had sued the
PHC Motors as the defendants.&nbsp; In an
attempt to enforce execution of the judgment, the Appellant filed garnishee
proceedings against the contemnor/respondent on the account that it was
believed that the judgment/debtor, PHC Motors Ltd had some shares in Alliance
Motors Ltd, the contemnor/ respondent. &nbsp;It
appears undisputed that Alliance Motors Ltd [contemnor/ respondent] was formed
by Tata Motors and PHC Motors.&nbsp; It is
claimed that PHC Motors held 40% shares in contemnor/respondent, standing in
the name of Paul Peprah, the Managing Director and the sole owner of PHC
Motors.&nbsp; &nbsp;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The High
Court, Accra before whom the garnishee proceedings were held, made a finding of
fact that PHC Motors held some shares in Alliance Motors, the contemnor/respondent.
&nbsp;Additionally, it found that Paul Peprah,
the Managing Director of PHC Motors Ltd was the sole owner of the company that
had 40% shares in Alliance Motors, contemnor/respondent. &nbsp;Based on these findings, the court ordered
that the 40% shares be sold in satisfaction of the judgment debt given in
appellant’s favour that stood at Ghc60,000.00.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The
appellant complains that the contemnor/respondent has refused to comply with
the order of the court and that triggered the contempt proceedings resulting in
the instant appeal before us.&nbsp; This is
because at the end of the contempt proceedings, the lower court held that the
appellant was unable to establish a case to warrant the respondent being held
in contempt.&nbsp; Consequently, the court
dismissed the contempt case against the contemnor/respondent.&nbsp; Being dissatisfied with the decision, the
appellant has filed the instant appeal.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Arguments
of Counsel for the appellant:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;As stated
supra, the only ground of appeal is that the trial court’s ruling dismissing
the contempt application was against the weight of evidence.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;To begin
with, learned Counsel for the appellant referred to the decision in Koglex
Ltd (No.2) v Field (2002) SCGLR 175 and argued that where an appeal
as in the instant case was based on the sole ground that the judgment was
against the weight of evidence, the appellate court is enjoined to examine for
itself whether or not the findings of the trial court were supportable by the
evidence and the law properly applied to the case.&nbsp; It invariably involved the rehearing of the
case, he stated.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Counsel then
referred to the court’s order Exhibit A, the anchor on which the instant appeal
hinges.&nbsp; He contended that the order of
the court was made known to the contemnor/respondent when a copy was served on
its Managing Director, whilst his representative was also in court during and
at the hearing of the garnishee proceedings.&nbsp;&nbsp;
He, therefore, argues that the contemnor/respondent was very much aware
of the garnishee absolute order.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;