Paul A. Gyampo Vrs Celestina Efua Bartels [2022] GHADC 5 (12 October 2022)

PAUL A. GYAMPO VRS. CELESTINA EFUA BARTELS IN THE DISTRICT COURT ONE, TEMA ON 12TH OCTOBER 2022 BEFORE H/W BIANCA ADWOA OSEI-SARFO (MRS.), SITTING AS MAGISTRATE. PAUL A. GYAMPO PETITIONER A12/67/2019 VRS. CELESTINA EFUA BARTELS RESPONDENT Parties PET.: Present RES.: Present Time:8:30 JUDGMENT This is a divorce matter come to judgment. The brief facts are as follows. The parties were married on the 13th day of December, 2014 at the Auditorium World Prayer Center. Their Marriage Certificate has licence number TMA/RM/1931/2014. The parties have a child together. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Respondent has committed adultery and had a child with a man she called her pastor. He averred that the Respondent herself confessed same to him. The Petitioner averred that the Respondent has caused him a lot of pain, trauma and emotional stress, and that he cannot be expected to continue with the relationship. He prayed for an order for a DNA test to be conducted on the Respondent who just delivered a new baby, and a dissolution of their marriage. PAUL A. GYAMPO VRS. CELESTINA EFUA BARTELS The Court heard both sides on the issue of the grant of the DNA test, and finding no reason to decline, granted same. The Respondent’s case was that the Petitioner treated her inhumanely when his lot in life began to improve, even going to the extent of being physically violent with her. She averred that one day, the Petitioner and his friends bumped into her sitting on a sofa in a Pastor’s room and they subjected him to severe brutalisation, and that it was a Police patrol team who came to his aid. The Respondent averred that the Petitioner conduct towards her was inhumane and had caused her a lot of stress, pain and disgrace, and that she was praying to the Court for a dissolution of the marriage. The sole ground for granting a petition for divorce shall be that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation as provided for in section 2 (1) of Act 367 and of particular importance to the instant (f) reproduced as follows:- (1) That 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: (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 PAUL A. GYAMPO VRS. CELESTINA EFUA BARTELS (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; (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. (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. Not much evidence was provided by either party to prove their averments or to disprove the allegations against them. Neither party called any witnesses. Subjecting the evidence led in this matter to the test under section 2(1) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1971, Act 367 and the facts gleaned from the petition and the trial, it has been incontrovertibly established as follows. 1. That the parties are currently estranged. 2. That the parties to the marriage have been unable to reconcile their differences. 3. That both parties consent to the grant of the divorce petition. PAUL A. GYAMPO VRS. CELESTINA EFUA BARTELS From the foregoing, it is the considered opinion of this Court that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation, the divorce petition is granted and the Court orders as follows. 1. The marriage celebrated between the Petitioner herein, Paul A Gyampo, the Petitioner herein, and Celestina A. Bartels, the Respondent herein, on 13/12/2014, has broken down beyond reconciliation, the Divorce Petition is granted, and the marriage is dissolved. 2. The Marriage Certificate with License number TMA/RM/1931/2014 is cancelled. Let a Divorce Certificate issue in lieu from the Court Registry. 3. There shall be no further orders. (SGD.) ...................................................................... H/W MRS. BIANCA A. OSEI-SARFO (ESQ.) DISTRICT COURT MAGISTRATE 4