ABUAH V. LEGAL PRACTITIONERS COMMITTEE

• Pages: 175-179

ABUAH V. LEGAL PRACTITIONERS COMMITTEE.

175

Viscount Simon goes on to say in respect of the fifth consideration that:

It is noteworthy that in recent years this last consideration has operated to in-

duce the Court to exercise a favourable discretion in many instances where in

5

an earlier time a decree would certainly have been refused.

As to the first point, the children have been with the respondent since 1958, they

have not been brought within the jurisdiction of the Courts in this country. The

answers to the 2nd and 4th points are, in view of the evidence on record and the

10

discretion statement, in the petitioner's favour. There is on the evidence on rec-

ord no possibility of a reconciliation between the parties and after weighing on the

one hand the need to make the parties and the public at large realise the binding

sanctity of marriage and on the other hand, the undesirability of insisting on the

maintenance of a marriage which has hopelessly broken down, I would exercise

15

my discretion in the petitioner's favour and order that the said marriage be dis-

solved.

I

allow this appeal, set aside the judgment of the trial Judge and order that

the marriage solemnised between the petitioner and the respondent on the 24th

March, 1956 be dissolved. I make no order as to the prayer for the custody of the

children since they are not within the court's jurisdiction, leaving it to the parties at

20

any future time if and whenever such event should arise, to move the lower court

in this respect.

On the question of costs I would not disturb the order of the trial Judge and fur-

ther order that the appellant in this court should bear the costs of this appeal, to

be assessed.

25

Ademola, C.J.F. I

concur.

Unsworth, F.J.

I concur.

Appeal allowed.

30

ABUAH V. LEGAL PRACTITIONERS COMMITTEE.

35

In the matter of the Legal Practitioners Act, Cap. 101:

AND

In the matter of

- -

A.C. ABUAH (Legal Practitioner).

A.C. ABUAH

RESPONDENT

V

40

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS COMMITTEE

COMPLAINANTS

SUIT NO. FSC 24/1962

Professional Ethics - Legal Practitioners Committee - Legal Practitioners Act Cap.

50





101 - Striking of the roll - Officer of Court - Court has discretion to strike

name off the roll - Grounds - Conviction of a criminal offence - Enquiry

into conduct of Legal practitioner following conviction of criminal offence -

Legal Practitioners Act Cap. 101, section 31.

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT

ADEMOLA,

C.J.F.

UNSWORTH,

F.J.

45

TAYLOR,

F.J.

BAIRAMIAN,

F.J.

30th April, 1962.