Businessman Richard Nii Armah Quaye has initiated a formal move toward resolving his ongoing marital dissolution proceedings by proposing an out of court settlement with his former spouse, Joana Quaye, in an effort to conclude the matter amicably and avoid prolonged judicial contestation.
In a correspondence dated May 7, 2026, legal representatives of Mr. Quaye, the firm Sory & Partners@Law, communicated with counsel for Joana Quaye, Dame & Partners, indicating that their client was prepared to revise and substantially enhance his financial offer in pursuit of reconciliation and peaceful resolution.
The proposal, explicitly stated to be made “without prejudice,” was framed as a conciliatory gesture intended to preserve familial stability and prioritise the emotional welfare and well-being of the children and both extended families involved in the dispute.
According to the contents of the letter, although the High Court had previously directed an alimony payment amounting to GH¢300,000, Mr. Quaye was now offering an increased sum of GH¢2 million as part of a comprehensive settlement arrangement designed to resolve all outstanding financial and ancillary issues between the parties.
The legal communication further emphasised that the businessman’s intention was to bring closure to all contentious matters arising from the divorce proceedings and to prevent further escalation or adversarial litigation.
This latest development emerges against the backdrop of ongoing controversy surrounding the conduct and management of the divorce case, which has attracted significant public and legal attention in recent months.
Earlier, Joana Quaye formally petitioned the Chief Justice and the Judicial Council, raising concerns about the conduct of the presiding judge, Justice Justin Dorgu, particularly regarding procedural timelines and the issuance of judgment.
Her petition alleged that while final orders were delivered on January 20, 2026, the full written judgment was not made available until April 20, 2026, a delay which she contends extended beyond the permissible appeal window and potentially compromised her right to effectively challenge the ruling.
Her legal team further argued that this delay materially affected her capacity to properly evaluate and respond to the judgment within the statutory timeframe, thereby raising questions about procedural fairness and due process.
The petition additionally called for a formal inquiry into whether any judicial irregularities or procedural breaches occurred in the handling and release of the judgment.
The divorce proceedings, which have increasingly drawn public scrutiny, involve contested issues relating to property division, child custody arrangements, and maintenance obligations, all of which remain central to the broader dispute now seeking resolution through negotiation rather than continued litigation.
