Lawyers to file terms of settlement in Shatta Wale defamation case
The Accra High Court has adjourned the case involving dancehall artiste, Nii Charles Armah Mensah, also known as Shatta Wale, to June 27, to enable the parties to file terms of settlement.
The adjournment was requested by lawyers for the dancehall artiste, to enable them to file terms of settlement.
Mr Frank Atese Kwabena, counsel for Shatta Wale, who held brief for Ms Cynthia Quarcoe, told the court presided over by Justice Joseph Agyemang Adu Owusu, that they had made progress in their engagements.
On November 2, 2022, Shatta Wale posted publication on his Facebook page, implicating his former manager, Lawrence Asiamah Hanson, also known a Bulldog, in the murder of Fennec Okyere, among others.
Bulldog sued Shatta Wale for defamation but, the parties have in various sittings especially counsel for Shatta Wale, told the court that the parties were willing to settle the matter out of court.
Since March 7, 2023, when the request was made, the parties have appeared in court at least three times, saying talks on settlement was progressing.
On April 18, 2023, lawyers for Shatta Wale again requested for a month for further negotiations after lawyers for Bulldog indicated the parties failed to reach agreement.
Back in court after a month, on May 16, 2023, lawyers for Shatta Wale indicated that, the parties have now agreed on settlement terms in principle.
Bulldog is seeking a declaration of the court that the publications made by the defendant as particularised in the statement of claim are defamatory to him.
The plaintiff is also praying the court for declaration of the court that the series of publications made by the respondent are malicious.
Bulldog is “seeking an order of the court directed at the respondent to on all his social media pages or accounts, make a publication on seven consecutive days of an unqualified retraction of and unreserved apology for the defamatory words that the defendant has published about the plaintiff, such retraction and apology to be vetted and approved by the plaintiff ’s lawyers.”
The plaintiff also wants an order of the court for perpetual injunction restraining the respondent, his agents, workmen, assigns and servants from publishing or further publishing any defamatory words against him (plaintiff).
He seeks general damages for defamation, special damages for defamation and punitive damages for malicious publication of falsehood against the plaintiff. —GNA
