THE REPUBLIC vs. FRANCIS YEBOAH & 5 ORS , EXPARTE JUNCHEN ENTERPRISE [2022]DLCA11782

Date	2022-05-12
Suit No.	SUIT NO. H1/104/2021
Citation No.	[2022]DLCA11782

M. WELBOURNE (MRS)

J.A. (PRESIDING)

BRIGHT MENSAH

J.A.

KYEI BAFFOUR

NYAADIIRE NSOBILLA ATINDAANA FOR APPLICANT/APPELLANT

GEORGE ESHUN WITH FRANCIS OHENE FOR 2ND AND 5TH RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

[2022]DLCA11782
																																						<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>FRANCIS YEBOAH &amp; 5 ORS<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>EXPARTE JUNCHEN ENTERPRISE<o:p></o:p>(APPLICANT/APPELLANT))<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, 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. H1/104/2021&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;DATE: 12TH MAY 2022<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>NYAADIIRE
NSOBILLA ATINDAANA FOR 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;">

GEORGE ESHUN WITH FRANCIS
OHENE FOR 2ND AND 5TH RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>M.
WELBOURNE (MRS), J.A. (PRESIDING), BRIGHT MENSAH, J.A., KYEI BAFFOUR, J.A.<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="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:normal;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>WELBOURNE<o:p></o:p>This is an appeal from the judgment of the High Court dated 16th
July 2020 on the subject matter of contempt of court. The main issue in this
matter is whether or not the Respondents are liable to be committed for
contempt of the trial court and its orders.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Black
Law Dictionary 7th Edition defines contempt as:<o:p></o:p><ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="1">
 <li class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;line-height:105%;
 mso-list:l1 level1 lfo8">The act or state of despising, condition
 of being despised.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;line-height:105%;
 mso-list:l1 level1 lfo8">Conduct that defies the authority or
 dignity of a court or legislature.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</li></ol>Contempt of court means any
conduct that interferes with or undermines the administration of justice. The
Supreme Court defines contempt of court as following in the Republic vrs High Court, Accra Ex-parte
Laryea Mensah [1998-99] SCGLR, 360:<o:p></o:p>“By definition, a person commits
contempt and may be committed to prison for willfully disobeying an order of
court requiring him to do any act other than the payment of money or abstain
from doing same act, and the order sought to be enforced should be unambiguous
and must be clearly understood by the parties concerned.”<o:p></o:p>The
Background <o:p></o:p>This is an application
brought under Order 50 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules C.I. 47,
seeking an Order of Committal for Contempt against the Respondents. The grounds
for the Application had been deposed to in an affidavit by one Yan Feng as
follows: That the 1st Respondent is a Licensed Auctioneer of the
High, court Commercial Division, 2nd Respondent is the owner of
unnumbered warehouse situate at North Kaneshie, Industrial area, 3rd
and 4th Respondents are the security men of the said warehouse,
whilst 5th Respondent is a tenant of the said warehouse where the
preserved goods were kept. According to Applicant, Junchen Enterprise Limited,
it commenced an action against one Amma fosua, the Defendant in Suit No
CM/RPS/0172/2018, Junchen Enterprise Ltd. vrs Amma Fosua, for the recovery of
an amount of GHȼ283,826.00
owed to Applicant. <o:p></o:p>The
Defendant filed a Statement of Defence and Counterclaimed for an amount of GHȼ2,268.00 as commission based on an
alleged oral agreement with the Applicant, and another GHȼ259,000.00 for loss of earnings. That
the Defendant applied to court for preservation of goods belonging to the
Applicant, and same was granted pursuant to which the 1st Respondent
seized 5,329 packages load of Applicants goods, which are footwear in sacks and
cartons, and caused them to be kept in a warehouse belonging to the 2nd
Respondent on the 13th day of March, 2019. <o:p></o:p>Applicant
averred that he applied and obtained a Variation of Preservation Order on 9th
May, 2019, and pursuant to that, on 26th September, 2019 in the
company of 1st Respondent acting on the instructions of the
Registrar, and in the presence of 2nd, 3rd, 4th
and 5th Respondents went to the warehouse to recover the preserved
goods. Applicant said he took pictures of the state of the goods before they
began to load them on trucks; however, they were able to recover only 886 out
of the 5,329 packages of the goods before the exercise was called off by the
Registrar of this Court. That pursuant to another Court Order dated 21st
October, 2019, when the Bailiff and agents of Applicant got to the warehouse
where the goods were kept, 3rd and 4th Defendants were
seen shutting the gates of the warehouse and asked them to come the following
morning for the goods. That on the morning of the 22nd of October,
2019, when the warehouse was opened in the presence of the deponent and the
Bailiff of court, an agent of 1st Respondent (Michael Aklo) and
agents of Applicant, as well as the 3rd, 4th and 5th
Respondents, he realized that the goods had been tampered with, because he
already had taken a photograph of the positioning and placement of the goods on
his earlier visit on </main>