SOLOMON O. D. TORSON vs. BARBARA TORSON [2020]DLHC10750

Date	2020-06-04
Suit No.	SUIT NO: DM 0430/2017
Citation No.	[2020]DLHC10750

HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE HAFISATA AMALEBOBA (MRS)

BRIGHT OKYERE ADJEKUM ESQ. FOR PETITIONER/RESPONDENT.

EMMANUEL L. DUBIK MAHAMA ESQ. FOR YAKUBU DUBIK MAHAMA ESQ FOR RESPONDENT/APPLICANT.

[2020]DLHC10750
																																						<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" >SOLOMON O. D. TORSON<o:p></o:p>(PETITIONER/
RESONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>BARBARA TORSON<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT
/APPLICANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT,
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;">

</div>COUNSEL:
<o:p></o:p>BRIGHT OKYERE ADJEKUM ESQ. FOR
PETITIONER/RESPONDENT.<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;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:150%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">EMMANUEL L. DUBIK MAHAMA
ESQ. FOR YAKUBU DUBIK MAHAMA ESQ FOR RESPONDENT/APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<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;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:150%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">HER
LADYSHIP JUSTICE HAFISATA AMALEBOBA (MRS),<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;BY COURT (RULING): <o:p></o:p>This
is an Application filed by the Respondent/Applicant, hereinafter referred to as
the Respondent, for maintenance pending suit. The Respondent, by the
Application prays for monthly maintenance in the sum of One Thousand Pounds (£1000.00);
for refund of accrued rent and water bills in the sum of Twenty Two Thousand,
Three Hundred and Eighty -Seven Pounds and Thirty – Four Pence (£22, 387.34) and
monthly rent of Seven Hundred and Forty Two Pounds and Eighty – Four Pence (£742.
84).<o:p></o:p>The
Petitioner/ Respondent, hereinafter referred to as the Petitioner, opposed the
Application. He contends that, he already pays the sum of Four Hundred Pounds (£
400.00) for maintenance of the children and that the Respondent receives child benefit
support, tax credit support and that the Council pays for accommodation.<o:p></o:p>I
have heard both Counsel on this Application, considered all processes filed and
Affidavit of Means of the parties. I have also considered section 22 of the
Matrimonial Causes Act 1971 (Act 367).<o:p></o:p>The
parties have three minor children.&nbsp; It is
not in dispute that the Respondent and the children of the marriage live in the
United Kingdom. Save for Four Hundred Pounds (£ 400.00), which the Petitioner asserts
that he pays, he does not deny that he does not pay rent, utilities, school,
lunch or any other expenses incurred by the Respondent and the children. He
however contends that, the Respondent is paid child support and tax credits by
the United Kingdom Government, to cater for these expenses and that education
is free for the children in the United Kingdom. &nbsp;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;I have heard both Counsel on this Application,
considered all processes filed, as well as section 22 of the Matrimonial Causes
Act 1971 (Act 367). It is the case of the Respondent that she is presently no longer
in employment. She has deposed to same by her Affidavit of Means, which has not
been challenged. The Petitioner is therefore the only parent in gainful employment.
By sections 6 and 47 of The Children’s Act 1998 (Act 560), it is the duty of a
parent to provide care, maintenance and necessaries of life, among others, for a
child. In the circumstances, the Petitioner who is the parent in gainful
employment, ought to be responsible for the maintenance of the children of the
marriage.<o:p></o:p>From
the Respondent’s Exhibit BT1 and BT2, it is established that though the Respondent
receives tax credits, she still has to pay some rent for the premises she lives
in with the children; and for water bills. It is also the case that though
education is free for the children of the marriage in the United Kingdom, they have
to pay for lunch expenses, among others, at the school. These are expenses that
are easily verifiable by the Petitioner. <o:p></o:p>In
the circumstances of this case, the Petitioner shall verify from the London
Borough of Barking and Dagenham, Essex Water and the children’s school and
shall pay all outstanding expenses due, on account of the Respondent and the
children, at these institutions, for rent, water bills and school expenses,
respectively. &nbsp;The Petitioner shall continue
to pay all expenses which shall become due after this Ruling, until the final
determination of this suit or other orders are made in this regard. The bills
shall be forwarded to the Petitioner by Respondent and he can verify same with
the respective institutions.<o:p></o:p>Furthermore,
I do not find the sum of Four Hundred Pounds (£ 400.00) a month, currently
being paid by the Petitioner, to be adequate for the care of three (3) children
of the marriage in the United Kingdom. The Petitioner shall pay to the Respondent
every month, commencing this month of June 2020, the sum of Nine Hundred Pounds
(£ 900.00), for the maintenance of the three (3) children of the marriage.<o:p></o:p>In respect
of arrears of rent and water bills claimed by the Respondent, I find that this
Court is unable to determine this prayer upon this Application. The Respondent is
at liberty to take steps to establish her assertions, upon evidence adduced at
the trial. The Application is granted in part.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; SGD.<o:p></o:p>HAFISATA
AMALEBOBA (MRS) <o:p></o:p>JUSTICE
OF TH</main>