The Supreme Court yesterday dismissed another application by businessman, Mr Alfred Agbesi Woyome, to stop his upcoming oral examination in relation to the GH¢51.2 million indebtedness to the state.

Mr Woyome is expected to be orally examined by the state on whether he owns properties, has the means to offset the debt owed the state as well as how he spent the GH¢51.2, wrongfully paid him.

On July 4, the Supreme Court presided over by a single judge, Mr Justice A.A Benin dismissed an application by Mr Woyome, seeking to halt his oral examination by the state, and declared it as having no merit.

Mr Woyome again filed a review application to halt his examination by the Attorney General.

In their ruling yesterday morning, the three-member panel, presided over by Mr Justice William Atuguba, said Mr Woyome’s review application was "misconceived” and accordingly dismissed it.

Lawyers of Mr Woyome wanted the court to reverse the decision of a single justice of the court, Mr Justice Anthony A. Benin, allowed for the businessman to be orally examined in relation to how he intends to pay the Ghc51.2 million and also for an embargo to be placed on his shares in 11 companies.

With the dismissal of his review application, the oral examination is anticipated to come off on July 24 a date set earlier by the court.

The court obliged Mr Woyome who reported sick previously and adjourned the matter to July 24, by which time he would have recovered for the oral examination.

Late last year, Justice Anin Yeboah sitting as a single judge granted an application brought by former Attorney-General, Martin Amidu, seeking to be allowed to orally examine Mr. Woyome.

But before the application could be determined, the A-G initiated fresh processes for the State to be allowed to conduct the oral examination.

This was granted by a sole judge, Justice A. A. Benin who ordered the businessman to appear before the Court on June 29 to be orally examined.

The Supreme Court in 2014 ordered the businessman to refund some GH¢51.2 wrongfully paid to by the state in 2010 and 2011.

The Court upheld arguments by Mr. Martin Amidu that the contracts, which formed the basis for Woyome’s claims against the state and for which he was paid the money, were unconstitutional as it lacks Parliamentary approval.

Mr Woyome’s promise to pay the money but has since not been able to honour that promise.