HAGGAI SERWA OFORI V. SAMPSON OFORI
Jurisdiction
HIGH COURT
Judge
N/A
Catalog Type
Case
Judgement Date
Jul 18, 2016
Summary
Matrimonial Causes — Divorce — Breakdown of Marriage beyond Reconciliation — Separation — Consent of Respondent — Adoption of Settlement Agreement as Consent Judgment. The Petitioner sought the dissolution of her marriage to the Respondent, whom she had married under the Marriage Ordinance in 2002. The parties had three children and had lived separately for about four years before the petition was filed. Evidence showed that several attempts by their families and church members to reconcile them had failed. The parties also executed terms of settlement covering child custody, maintenance, educational expenses, medical care, and property distribution. The Court found that the parties had not lived together as husband and wife for at least two years immediately before the petition and that the marriage had broken down beyond reconciliation within the meaning of section 2(1)(d) of the Matrimonial Causes Act, 1971 (Act 367). The Court consequently dissolved the marriage and adopted the parties’ terms of settlement as a consent judgment, granting custody of the children to the Petitioner, reasonable access to the Respondent, and enforcing the agreed arrangements on maintenance and property settlement.
Full Content
JUDGMENT
The parties were married under the Marriage Ordinance (Cap 127) (1951 Rev.) on the 27th of October, 2002 at the Christ Apostolic Church International at Bogosu, Tarkwa. There are three issues of the marriage namely; Richard Ofori, Princess-Esther Ofori and Keziah Ofori who were 11, 8 and 3 years old respectively when the petition was filed on the 4th day of December, 2014. The Petitioner and the Respondent are both Police Officers on the ranks of Inspector and Lance Corporal respectively.
On the grounds that the Respondent has behaved in such a way that the Petitioner cannot be expected to live with him, the Petitioner is praying the Court for the following reliefs:
1. That the marriage in fact celebrated between the parties be dissolved.
2. That the Petitioner be granted custody of the three issues of the marriage namely Richard Ofori, Esther Ofori and Keziah Ofori.
3. That Respondent be ordered to contribute to the care and maintenance of the three issues of the marriage who are dependent on the Petitioner.
4. A recovery of the sum of three thousand cedis (GH¢3000) being the cost of ten kente cloths from Respondent and interest thereon from September 2009 when Respondent took the kente till date of final payment.
5. A recovery of the sum of GH¢2,500 being the sums withdrawn from Petitioner’s account by Respondent and interest thereon from August 2011 when Respondent withdrew the said sums till date of final payment.
6. Recovery of the sum of GH¢7,000 being the present estimated cost of Petitioner’s vehicle with Registration No. 2653 R.
7. That the Respondent be ordered to make to the Petitioner such maintenance pending suit and thereafter such periodical payments and/or lump sum as may be just.
8. A declaration that property situates and known as Satellite Junction Pokuase, Kuntuse, Koans Estate is a joint property of Petitioner and Respondent.
9. An order distributing the jointly acquired properties between Respondent and Petitioner.
10.Costs incidental to this petition and damages for bigamy.
The Respondent filed an Answer denying the material particulars. He cross-petitioned as follows:
a) An order of the court granting the Respondent reasonable access to the 3 children out of the marriage namely Richard Ofori, Princess Esther Ofori and Keziah Agyewaa Ofori.
b) An order of the court directing the Petitioner to show the Respondent where the 3 children are schooling and staying.
c) An order of the court permitting the Respondent to pay monthly maintenance of GH¢300.00 for the 3 children.
d) An order of the Court directing the Petitioner to share responsibilities touching and concerning the children named supra.
The Petitioner was represented by her lawful attorney in the person of Mary Boatemaa. The witness tendered a power of attorney which was admitted in evidence as EXHIBIT ‘A’. She also tendered a photocopy of the marriage certificate which was admitted in evidence as EXHIBIT ‘B’. She told the Court that the Petitioner who is her sister and the Respondent have been living apart and separately for the past 4 years and that attempts by the family members of the respective parties, church members and Pastors of their church to resolve their differences did not yield any fruitful results. She testified further that the issues of the marriage are Richmond Ofori, Princess Ofori and Keziah Ofori who are now 13, 10 and 4 years old respectively. She stated that they are presently living with the Petitioner. She also told the Court that the parties have executed terms of settlement which was admitted in evidence as EXHIBIT ‘C’. She prayed for the adoption of the terms of settlement.
The Respondent who was present in Court elected neither to cross-examine the Petitioner’s lawful attorney nor give evidence in Court.
By virtue of the Matrimonial Causes Act, 1971 (Act 367), the only ground for the grant of a divorce petition is that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation. Section 2 (1) of Act 367, for the purposes of showing that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation, specifies facts, the existence of which the Court will take into consideration in determining same. On the evidence, the attorney testified that the parties have not lived together as man and wife for the past 4 years as provided by Section 2 (1) (d) as follows: “that the parties to the marriage have not lived together 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 a decree of divorce; provided that such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, and where the Court is satisfied that it has been so withheld, the Court may grant a petition for divorce under this paragraph notwithstanding the refusal.
I find that they have not lived as man and wife for at least 2 years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition and the Respondent consents to the divorce. Additionally, on the evidence, I find also that due to irreconcilable differences after diligent efforts by the parties’ respective families and church members, the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation.
Accordingly, I decree the marriage celebrated between the Petitioner and the Respondent on the 27th of October 2002, at the Christ Apostolic Church International, Bogoso, Tarkwa dissolved.
In respect of the ancillary reliefs, I enter terms of settlement filed on the 13th of June 2016, signed by the parties with their respective Counsel as consent judgment of the Court as follows:
1. The Petitioner shall have custody of the three (3) children of the marriage whilst the Respondent shall have reasonable access to the children.
2. That the parties have resolved that the maintenance of the three (3) children, Richard Ofori -11 years, Princess Esther – 8 years and Keziah Ofori – 3 years shall be the equal responsibility of the Petitioner and the Respondent.
3. The Respondent shall contribute the sum of GH¢150.00 monthly per each child to Petitioner through a designated account towards the maintenance and upkeep of the children which sum shall be reviewed upwards annually upon agreed terms or by order of Court upon an application.
4. That the Respondent shall pay outstanding maintenance of GH¢2,300.00 for the three (3) children from the 2nd day of September, 2015 to June, 2016.
5. The Petitioner and the Respondent shall be equally responsible for the educational expenses for the three (3) children which may include school fees, transportation, school feeding fees, books and stationery, extra classes organised by the school, excursion, school uniforms, etc.
6. The present ascertained termly educational expenses being:
a. Richard Ofori
i. School fees GH¢435.00
ii. School bus transportation GH¢140.00
iii. School feeding GH¢140.00
iv. Extra Classes GH¢30.00
Total: GH¢745.00
b. Princess Esther Ofori
i. School fees GH¢415.00
ii. School bus transportation GH¢140.00
iii. School feeding GH¢140.00
iv. Extra Classes GH¢30.00
Total: GH¢725.00
c. Keziah Ofori
i. School fees GH¢405.00
ii. School bus transportation GH¢140.00
iii. School feeding GH¢140.00
iv. Extra Classes GH¢30.00
Total: GH¢715.00
d. Books for the three (3) children supplied by the School, Firm Foundation being six hundred and fifty Ghana cedis (GH¢650.00)
7. That total outstanding ascertained termly educational expenses from 2nd day of September, 2015 to June, 2016 being three (3) terms educational expenses for the three (3) children now stand at seven thousand, two hundred and five Ghana cedis (GH¢7,205.00).
8. The Petitioner shall pay forty percent (40%) of the total outstanding ascertained fees per term for each child whilst the Respondent shall pay the remaining sixty percent (60%).
9. The Petitioner and the Respondent shall be equally responsible for subsequent educational (current and future) expenses in same proportion as stated at paragraph 8 above.
10. Petitioner and Respondent shall be fully and equally responsible for the medical expenses of the children and each parent will take turns to register the children under the NHIS scheme or any other similar scheme in addition to any other medical provision that may be made for the children.
11. That the Petitioner shall accept the sum of ten thousand Ghana cedis (GH¢10,000.00) in full and final settlement of all property and financial provision.
12. That upon full payment of the sum of GH¢10,000.00 to the Petitioner, the Petitioner shall relinquish any interest she has in the unnumbered house at Kobikope Kuntunse, near Accra, and the title deeds bearing the name of the couple shall be changed into the name of the Respondent.
13. The terms stipulated herein shall be filed and adopted by Court as consent judgment which shall bind the parties and take effect from the date the said consent judgment is entered.
14. The terms of settlement herein contained shall be subject to the usual default clause.
15. There shall be no order as to costs.
SGD.
CECILIA DON-CHEBE AGBEVEY J.
JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT