Mr Alfred Agbesi Woyome, the embattled businessman, has filed another application at the Supreme Court for stay of proceedings this time requesting for a five-member panel of the court.
Mr Woyome is battling to repay an amount of over 52 million cedis which the state said was wrongfully paid to him when he claimed to have a contract with the state which proved later to be false.
The Case was adjourned to November 21, 2017.
The court on October 21, dismissed an earlier application filed by Mr Woyome, to halt the valuation of his property by the State as part of efforts to retrieve the money, the court at the time was empaneled by a single judge.
Mr. Woyome is praying the court to put on hold all processes to reclaim the money from him until a determination of another related case being heard at the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
The Attorney -General was expected to continue with the oral examination on how, Woyome intends to re-pay the amount however he was not in court on Monday as his counsel explained that he was unwell.
Ghana News Agency legal news bulletin indicates that previously, the Counsel for Mr Woyome, Mr Osafo Boabeng, had filed an application arguing that the writ of execution that the Attorney General (AG) used for the valuation was illegal.
He argued that the AG failed to seek consent from the apex court to renew the writ of execution and, therefore, any action based on that writ was a nullity.
The court, presided over by, Justice Alfred Anthony Benin, on October 20, dismissed the application saying the AG did nothing wrong because the writ of execution had not expired and was effective.
He said the first writ of execution which was filed on January 9, 2015 was still in effect when the AG filed for another one on January 6, 2016 and, therefore, the issue of renewal did not arise.
The court subsequently, adjourned the matter to October 30, for continuation of the oral examination of Mr Woyome by the AG.
On October 30, Lawyers for Woyome, told the court that he was still ill and was unable to attend court.
Mr Buaben presented yet another excuse duty document to the single Justice handling the case in his chambers to support the request of his client to be given more time to make himself available for his oral examination to continue.
The Deputy Attorney General, Godfred Dame, who represented the AG did not oppose the latest plea for more time from the judgment debtor.
