KONAMA FELICIA VRS: EMMANUEL YEBOAH
by HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE GABRIEL NENE KWAO MATE TEYE
Jurisdiction
HIGH COURT
Judge
HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE GABRIEL NENE KWAO MATE TEYE
Catalog Type
Case
Judgement Date
Nov 03, 2023
Summary
Family Law – Divorce – Ordinance Marriage – Breakdown of Marriage – Prolonged Separation – Mutual Admission – Custody of Children – Maintenance – Compensation – Matrimonial Property – Consent Judgment – Alternative Dispute Resolution – Matrimonial Causes Act, 1971 (Act 367). This case involves a divorce petition filed by Felicia Konama against Emmanuel Yeboah on 14 January 2020, seeking dissolution of their marriage, custody of their five children, maintenance, and distribution of matrimonial property. The Respondent entered appearance and later filed an answer and cross-petition also seeking dissolution, custody, and settlement of property matters. Efforts at settlement through ADR failed, and the case proceeded to trial. Both parties testified and agreed that the marriage had broken down beyond reconciliation, having lived apart for over five years without marital relations. Relying on the Matrimonial Causes Act, 1971 (Act 367), the Court found sufficient grounds and dissolved the marriage. Custody of the children was granted to the Petitioner, with reasonable access to the Respondent. The Respondent was ordered to pay GH¢1,500 monthly for child maintenance and GH¢20,000 as compensation to the Petitioner. The Court also adopted the parties’ Terms of Settlement as consent judgment, under which the Respondent transferred all jointly acquired properties, including houses, plots of land, and farmlands, to the Petitioner and the children.
Full Content
JUDGMENT
The Petitioner, Felicia Konama of H/No DP 164, Drobo filed the petition for divorce on 14/01/2020 praying the Court for the following against the Respondent, Emmanuel Yeboah, thus;
(a) A declaration that the H/No D169, Drobo was acquired during the subsistence of the marriage and an order sharing same to the parties.
(b) An order for dissolution of the marriage between the parties.
(c) An order that the Petitioner be given custody of all the five (5) children.
(d) An order for maintenance for 5 years.
(e) An order of the Court directed at the Respondent to pay for the solicitor’s fees.
(f) Any further order(s) of the Court shall deem fit.
On the 28/01/2020, the Respondent filed a notice of appearance through his Counsel, Bright Obeng Manu, Esq.
Therefore, the Petitioner through her Counsel, Joseph Addae Akwaboah filed for a search on 11/2/2020 at the Registry with the following questions;
1. Whether or not the Respondent has entered appearance.
Answer: yes
If yes, when?
Answer: 28/1/2020
2. And whether or not the Respondent has filed his answer.
ANSWER: No
On 14/2/2020, the Petitioner filed for a change of Solicitor with Lawrence Adomah Esquire replacing Bright Obeng-Manu Esquire.
Subsequently, the Respondent on 2/2/2020 filed, “answer to the petition and cross petition” thus;
“The respondent repeats paragraphs 1 to 23 of the answer and cross petition as follows;
(a) Dissolution of the marriage between the respondent and the Petitioner.
(b) Settlement of the case
(c) Custody of the children
(d) An order for the Petitioner to render accounts in respect of her management of EMFILIO COMPANY LIMITED and their matrimonial property.
Thereafter, the Petitioner filed on the 18/2/2020 for setting down for trial.
The matter was referred to the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), however, the case was referred back to the Court with the following notes;
“this discontinuation with the above-mentioned mediation is due to the fact that settlement has failed thus both parties have taken entrenched positions and since all efforts to resolve this matter has proven futile, it is only obligatory on us to refer the case”……
Counsel for the Petitioner filed on 8/07/2020 a reply to Petition and Response to cross-petition filed on 23/06/2020.
Subsequently, Petitioner filed her witness statement on 21/05/2021 together with the pre-trial check list.
The Respondent also filed his witness statement as well as the pre-trial check list on 28/05/2021.
The parties filed terms of settlement on 14/03/2022 which will form part of the judgment as at the end of the case.
On the 7th July, 2023, the Petitioner gave evidence and told the Court, he had filed her witness statement at the Registry of the Court.
In cross-examination by the Respondent, Petitioner indicated that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation and prays for the marriage to be dissolved.
The Petitioner did not call any witness at the end of her case. The Respondent, Emmanuel Yeboah gave evidence and stated that he filed his witness statement as his evidence in chief.
In cross-examination, he affirmed the fact that the marriage between the parties (Petitioner and Respondent) has broken down beyond reconciliation and that for almost two (2) years each one of them has gone his/her separate ways.
He stated that the dissolution of the marriage will be better for the parties. The Respondent did not call any witness as well.
Under section 2 of the Matrimonial Causes Act, 1971 (Act 367) of Ghana, for the purpose of showing that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation, the Petitioner shall satisfy the Court of one or more of the following facts;
2(1) (a) that the Respondent has committed adultery and that by reasons of such adultery the Petitioner finds it intolerable to live with the Respondents; or
(b) That the Respondent has committed behaved in such a way that the Petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the Respondent; or
(c) That the Respondent has deserted the petitioner for a continuous period of at least two
(2) years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition, or
(d) that the parties to the marriage have not lived as man and wife for a continuous period of at least two (2) years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition and the Respondent consents to the grant of a decree of divorce provided that such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, and where the Court may grant a petition for divorce under this sub-section notwithstanding the refusal, or
(e) That the parties to the marriage have not lived as man and wife for a continuous period of at least five immediately preceding presentation, or;
(f) That the parties to the marriage have, after diligent effort, been unable to reconcile their differences.
(2) On a petition for divorce it shall be the duty of the Court to inquire, so far as is reasonable, into the facts alleged by the petitioner and the Respondent.
(3) Notwithstanding that the Court finds the existence of one or more of the facts specified in subsection (1) the Court shall not grant a petition for divorce unless it is satisfied on all the evidence, that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation.
It is the finding of the Court that both parties have stated that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation and therefore both parties pray the Court for dissolution of the marriage.
The parties have since gone their separate ways and had not had any sexual relations as married couples for over five (5) years preceding the filing of this divorce petition on 14/01/2020.
The five children namely;
1. Manas Oppong (19 years)
2. Caleb Yeboah (17 years)
3. Gel Yeboah ( 14 years)
4. Joel Yeboah ( 13 years) and
5. Gad Yeboah (9 years)
The Court makes an order for the children to be in custody with the Petitioner with the Respondent having reasonable access to them as he may request with prior notice given to the Petitioner.
The Respondent (Emmanuel Yeboah) is to pay maintenance of the children with an amount of GH¢1,500.00 per month. The amount is ordered to be paid into the Petitioner’s account by the fourth (4th) day of the next month. (Every month)
The Petitioner prayed for maintenance for the past 5 years, but did not indicate how much or the quantum of the amount she wanted the Court to determine and therefore I will direct the Respondent to compensate her with an amount of GH¢20,000.00.
The parties having agreed that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation, Consequently, I decree that the marriage between the Respondent, Emmanuel Yeboah and the Petitioner, Konama Felicia contracted under the Registrar’s certificate on 2/08/1998 is hereby dissolved.
The parties may go their separate ways.
The Court in the first instant referred the matter to the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) for an attempted settlement. However the parties decided together with their Lawyers to settle the matter in terms of the acquired property which was filed on the 14/3/2023 signed by parties, Felicia Konama (Petitioner) and Emmanuel Yeboah (Respondent) and the Lawyers involved, Joseph Addae Akwaboa Esq. for the Petitioner and Lawrence Adomah Esq. for the Respondent.
Per the terms of settlement as filed on 14/3/2023 as parts of the Judgment, it is stated that
“This matter having been settled amicably out of court between the Petitioner and the Respondent, an agreement was reached as follows; (which the Court adopts as consent Judgment).
1. That the Respondent (Emmanuel Yeboah) who cross petitioned against the Petitioner has agreed with the Petitioner that he gladly gives away all the properties contained in the cross petition to the Petitioner (Felicia Konama) and the children.
2. For the avoidance of doubt, the properties referred to in paragraph 1 supra includes;
i. One (1) residential building with Boys’ quarters (plot No. D169, Drobo) four apartments for renting of which Respondent bought the land situate at Drobo.
ii. Storey building of which only the ground floor has been built and serving as wholesale store near the slaughter house at Drobo.
iii. An uncompleted building which was bought from Atta Kantanka which is also located at Drobo (Plot No 19, Block “R”), Drobo
iv. One building plot No. 11 which is located near the Catholic University and in the joint names of the Respondent and the Petitioner.
v. One building plot which is located at Ampenkro North (Plot No. 1 Block “D”), Sunyani and in the joint names of the Respondent and the Petitioner.
vi. Two (2) different farmlands for cashew and cocoa farms located at Baabianiha in the Jaman South District.
3. That the Respondent has agreed that all other properties acquired during the subsistence of the marriage should as well be given to the Petitioner and the children of the marriage.
GABRIEL NENE KWAO MATE-TEYE
(JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT)
Counsel: Joseph Addae Akwaboah for the Petitioner.
Counsel: Lawrence Adomah for the Respondent.