New Date For Woyome Properties Judgement
Afred Agbesi Woyome
Court has set a new date to deliver its judgment on some properties said to
belong to embattled NDC financier, Agbesi Woyome, which the state wants to confiscate
to offset the GH¢51.2 million
he fraudulently received as judgment debt.
The court had
set January 21, 2019, to deliver its judgment on claims by defunct UT Bank that
the properties identified belong to the bank which is in receivership and
cannot be confiscated by the state.
judgment was indefinitely suspended following an application by Woyome’s
lawyers for a review of the decision of the court presided over by a single
judge, Justice Alfred A. Benin, to dismiss an objection seeking the court to have
the ongoing proceedings moved to the High Court.
review panel of three justices presided over by Justice Julius Ansah dismissed
the application giving way for the single judge to go ahead with his judgment.
The court was
yesterday expected to deliver the judgment which would determine whether the
identified properties belong to Woyome or UT Bank.
has, however, been adjourned to June 27 following the filing of fresh processes
by Anator Holdings which is claiming ownership of a quarry which the state says
belongs to Mr. Woyome.
the judge had already written his judgment on the claims by the defunct bank
but has decided to ‘incorporate’ the latest processes filed by Anator Holdings
in the final decision.
the source, the judge does not want to give two separate judgments in a matter
which is considered to be the same, hence the adjournment.
The state in
its efforts to recover the GH¢51.2 million
the NDC financier fraudulently received as judgment debt has identified five
properties belonging to Woyome each worth about $1.5 million.
Moves by the
state to confiscate the properties it has identified were truncated by claims
that some of those properties were not his but rather belong to others.
of UT Bank, Eric Nana Nipa, in his witness statement to the apex court, claimed
the bank acquired the properties from Mr. Woyome on April 5, 2013 and May 13,
Attorney General, Godfred Yeboah, who cross-examined the receiver, pointed out
inaccuracies in statements by UT Bank, insisting that the claims are
instruments of deceit to frustrate efforts by the state to execute the judgment
of the Supreme Court.
cross-examination, Mr. Dame revealed that there was no deed of transfer between
Woyome and UT Bank which guarantees the bank the right to lay claim to the
properties in question.
all documents filed by UT Bank, including the land title certificates and site
plans of the said properties, are all in the name of Mr. Woyome.
Mr. Dame accused the receivers of UT bank of colluding with Mr. Woyome to frustrate efforts by the state to sell the properties.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak