{"id":341875,"date":"2017-08-03T20:45:07","date_gmt":"2017-08-03T20:45:07","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/citifmonline.com\/?p=341875"},"modified":"2017-08-03T20:45:07","modified_gmt":"2017-08-03T20:45:07","slug":"icc-rejects-woyomes-petition-over-judgement-saga","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/citifmonline.com\/2017\/08\/icc-rejects-woyomes-petition-over-judgement-saga\/","title":{"rendered":"ICC rejects Woyome’s petition over judgement saga"},"content":{"rendered":"
The International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) has rejected Alfred Woyome\u2019s petition concerning the GHc 51 million judgment debt saga.<\/p>\n
A document sighted by Citi News<\/strong> revealed that court decided that the petition would not proceed per Article 6(4) of its Arbitration Rules.<\/p>\n The article in question says:<\/p>\n In all cases referred to the Court under Article 6(3), the Court shall decide whether and to what extent the arbitration shall proceed. The arbitration shall proceed if and to the extent that the Court is prima facie satisfied that an arbitration agreement under the Rules may exist. In particular:<\/p>\n (i) where there are more than two parties to the arbitration, the arbitration shall proceed between those of the parties, including any additional parties joined pursuant to Article 7, with respect to which the Court is prima facie satisfied that an arbitration agreement under the Rules that binds them all may exist; and<\/p>\n (ii) where claims pursuant to Article 9 are made under more than one arbitration agreement, the arbitration shall proceed as to those claims with respect to which the Court is prima facie satisfied (a) that the arbitration agreements under which those claims are made may be compatible, and (b) that all parties to the arbitration may have agreed that those claims can be determined together in a single arbitration.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Article 6(4) also notes that the \u201cCourt\u2019s decision pursuant to Article 6(4) is without prejudice to the admissibility or merits of any party\u2019s plea or pleas.\u201d<\/p>\n Cries of persecution<\/strong><\/p>\n Mr. Woyome petition came around the time he had come out publicly to say he felt he was being persecuted<\/a><\/strong><\/span> by the Supreme Court in the matter of the judgement debt.<\/p>\n This came on the back of the Court\u2019s approval, at the time, for him to be orally examined<\/a><\/strong><\/span> by former Attorney General, Martin Amidu.<\/p>\n Arguing this point, Mr. Woyome further noted that after an earlier judgment served him to pay the GHc 51 million, the Supreme Court rejected his mode of payment.<\/p>\n According to him, he had wanted to pay GHc4 million and spread the rest over a period of time but his appeal was rejected by the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n The embattled business is once again in court and has appeared<\/a><\/strong><\/span> to be orally examined by the Attorney General’s office on issues pertaining to whether he owes any debts, whether he has property to satisfy the debt, and the manner in which he used the judgment debt money paid him, among others.<\/p>\n This appearance saw Mr. Woyome reveal he had been out of business since 2012 as he lost all his businesses after his arrest in 2011 and subsequent trial.<\/p>\n