ABOAGYE VRS. ADDOQUAYE (A8/040/24) [2024] GHADC 490 (25 October 2024)

CORAM: HER WORSHIP AMA ADOMAKO-KWAKYE (MS.), MAGISTRATE, SITTING AT THE DISTRICT COURT ‘2’, KOTOBABI NEAR THE KOTOBABI CLUSTER OF SCHOOLS, ACCRA ON 25TH OCTOBER, 2024. SUIT NO. A8/040/24 VICTORIA ABOAGYE PIG FARM, ACCRA :: PETITIONER VRS. EBENEZER ADDOQUAYE ABELENKPE, ACCRA :: RESPONDENT JUDGMENT Introduction In her Petition for divorce filed on 31st August 2023, the Petitioner, an Insurer, prayed the Court to dissolve the marriage between her and the Respondent, a Businessman, which was celebrated on 30th April 2017 at the Christ Apostolic Church, Nima. The parties have two children together, Alisha Adoley Addoquaye and Alvin Adotey Addoquaye who at the time of institution of the suit were aged 5 years and 2 and half years respectively. The parties settled some issues using the Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanism and they executed Terms of Agreement on 12th April 2024 which they both prayed the Honourable Court to adopt. The parties agreed as follows: 1. That the marriage should be dissolved. VICTORIA ABOAGYE V. EBENEZER ADDOQUAYE 1 2. That the Respondent will pay the children’s maintenance fee of Four Hundred Ghana Cedis (GH¢400.00) each month. 3. That the Respondent will continue to pay the children’s school fees when school bill is drawn. 4. That the Petitioner will not take any alimony or compensation from the Respondent whatsoever. 5. That the medical bills will be borne by both parties and should be with the consent of both parties. 6. That the Respondent will visit the children as and when practicable. Petitioner’s Case It is the Petitioner’s case that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation. She averred that the Respondent refused to support her when she took seed with their first child and the situation worsened when the Respondent lost his job since she now had to be saddled with the responsibility of taking care of the Respondent as well. She stated that notwithstanding her assumption of the role of taking care of the family, the Respondent failed to reciprocate her kind gesture, abusing her verbally frequently and ordering her to leave the matrimonial home. The Petitioner stated that Respondent issued threats to her mother to the effect that if she did not come for Petitioner, she would have herself to blame. Consequently, her sister and auntie went with her to pack out her belongings. She averred that the Respondent regretted his actions and pleaded through their pastor for her to return home and to the displeasure of her mother and siblings, she gave in to the unrelentless pleas and went back to the Respondent. She averred that she took seed not long thereafter and the Respondent started being verbally abusive again, failed to maintain the family and became disrespectful to her mother. She further VICTORIA ABOAGYE V. EBENEZER ADDOQUAYE 2 stated that Respondent’s refusal to maintain the children and threats to forcibly take custody of the children compelled her to file a case at the Family Court for custody and maintenance. She averred that in one of Respondent’s outbursts, he blurted out how he slept with one of her friends. It is Petitioner’s case that the Respondent has caused her embarrassment and distress hence her reliefs sought. Respondent’s case In his Answer to Divorce Petition filed on 12th October 2023, the Respondent contended that he had been supporting the Petitioner financially and in other respects. He averred that he got a job at a restaurant not long after he lost his job with the American Embassy and as such, he was taking care of the Petitioner. The Respondent denied ordering the Petitioner to leave the matrimonial home but that, he called her mother to come and advise her. Unfortunately, situations worsened when her mother came. He stated that he was the one who rented a place for the Petitioner when she packed out her belongings with the assistance of her sister and aunt. The Respondent denied sending a plea through their pastor. He explained that the Pastor visited him and it was through their conversation that he got to know that the Petitioner had packed out so he invited both parties to the church for reconciliation which was successful. He averred that the Petitioner liked nagging and refused to listen to any suggestion from him. He denied disrespecting Petitioner’s mother and also denied saying at any time that he has slept with Petitioner’s friend. He averred that the Petitioner denied him access to the children when she moved out so he lodged a complaint at DOVVSU where they directed Petitioner to allow him have access but she refused and rather filed a case at the Family and Juvenile Court. Although she was asked to grant him access, she often refuses to grant him access. He averred that it was the unreasonable VICTORIA ABOAGYE V. EBENEZER ADDOQUAYE 3 behaviour of the Petitioner which had caused their marriage to break down beyond reconciliation. Reply On 23rd May, 2024, the Petitioner responded to the Respondent’s Answer. She averred that the Respondent was jobless because he was always in conflict with his bosses and that he lacked the competence to work for long because he always wanted to rely on her. She averred that Respondent’s inability to provide the necessaries of life for the children is what compelled her to file the suit at the Family and Juvenile Court. She denied Respondent’s assertion that he called her mother to advise her and added that Respondent’s threats put her life in danger and that was why her aunt and sister came to pack her belongings. The Petitioner averred that the Respondent had on several occasions broken his promise of changing from his disrespectful and uncaring attitude and that was why her aunt and sister got fed up with the supposed reconciliation with the Respondent. She stated that the Respondent did not tell her he had slept with her friend but her friend’s attitude changed. She averred that the Respondent was undeserving of her love. Issue The only issue for the Court’s determination is whether or not the marriage between the Petitioner and the Respondent has broken down beyond reconciliation. Evaluation of Evidence Section 1(1) of the Matrimonial Causes Act, 1971 (Act 367) allows either party to a marriage to present a petition to the Court for divorce. Section 1(2) of the Act further emphasizes that, the sole ground for granting a petition for divorce shall be that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation. In order to prove that a marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation, VICTORIA ABOAGYE V. EBENEZER ADDOQUAYE 4 a Petitioner has the duty of satisfying the Court of the existence of at least one of the six facts specified in section 2(1)(a)-(f) of Act 367. Proof of any one of these facts raises a presumption that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation. If any of the facts is made out, the Court must grant the dissolution unless it is satisfied that the marriage has not broken down irretrievably. These facts include the following: a. That the respondent has committed adultery and that by reason of such adultery the petitioner finds it intolerable to live with the respondent; or b. That the respondent has 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 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 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 is satisfied that it has been so withheld, the Court may grant a petition for divorce under this paragraph notwithstanding the refusal; e. That the parties to the marriage have not lived as man and wife for a continuous period of at least five years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition; or f. That the parties to the marriage have, after diligent effort, been unable to reconcile their differences. Before the Court can dissolve the marriage, it must satisfy itself that it has been proved on the preponderance of probabilities that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation. See: Charles Akpene Ameko v Saphira Kyerema Agbenu [2015] 91 G.M.J. 202 @ 221. VICTORIA ABOAGYE V. EBENEZER ADDOQUAYE 5 Both parties testified by relying on their respective witness statements filed on 5th July 2024 and 7th July 2024 respectively. They did not cross examine each other. The Petitioner’s evidence was that the Respondent during the subsistence of the marriage had failed to show her love and care, often disrespected her and her relatives and also shirked all the responsibility of the household on her. It was Petitioner’s testimony that Respondent often threatened her and this compelled her to leave their matrimonial home. Petitioner further testified that Respondent subsequently showed remorse for his deeds, apologized and asked that she moves back into their matrimonial home. According to her, shortly after the parties reconciled their differences despite the opposition from her relatives, Respondent reneged on his words and continued his unreasonable behaviour. On his part, the Respondent testified that the Petitioner’s attitude changed suddenly after the birth of their second child and that there was no love, respect and proper communication in their marriage. He stated that despite the intervention of friends and family to ensure that Petitioner performed her duties as a married woman, Petitioner was adamant and persisted in her unreasonable behaviour. Respondent further testified that Petitioner unceremoniously moved out of their matrimonial home and called for his arrest which caused his detention at the Tesano Police Station for a day. According to the Respondent, he had been a responsible husband and father to the Petitioner and their children and has been providing for them even though he earns very little. He stated that he was disinterested in the marriage due to the embarrassment, disrespect and insults he has suffered at the hands of the Petitioner. It is evident from the parties’ evidence and posture that they are both not interested in their marriage again at all. Their marriage has been characterized by disrespect and verbal abuse from both of them. As a matter of fact, love and respect for each other seems to have dissipated from their union. They have both behaved unreasonably towards each other. It seems as though both VICTORIA ABOAGYE V. EBENEZER ADDOQUAYE 6 parties have no hope in reviving whatever love they once shared. This is evident in the terms executed by them when they were referred to the Court connected ADR. Although they were able to patch up their differences at a point in time with the assistance of their pastor, situations did not improve for the better but worsened and it has led to the institution of this suit. I find that the parties’ marriage has indeed broken down beyond reconciliation. Conclusion The Court is satisfied from the evidence on record that the marriage between the parties has broken down beyond reconciliation and the Petitioner is therefore entitled to the relief for a dissolution of the marriage between her and the Respondent. The Court therefore grants the relief of the Petitioner and decrees that the marriage celebrated between the parties on 30th April 2017 at the Christ Apostolic Church International, Nima is hereby dissolved. Consequently, Marriage Certificate with License No. AMA 101702448/2017 and Certificate No. CACI/NM/14/2017 is cancelled. The Terms executed by the parties on 12th April 2024 are adopted and incorporated as part of this judgment. AMA ADOMAKO-KWAKYE (MS.) (MAGISTRATE) VICTORIA ABOAGYE V. EBENEZER ADDOQUAYE 7