[1960]DLCA72 • May 30, 1960 • Court of Appeal
ARMAH AND ANOTHER vs. QUAGRAINE
The case concerned the interpretation of the will and codicil of J.E. Biney, deceased, and whether the defendant, as Administrator of the Estate of J.B. Apprey (deceased), was entitled to administer Biney's estate. Biney appointed Apprey as sole heir and administrator of his estate. After Apprey's death, the defendant succeeded him as administrator of Apprey's estate. The plaintiffs, claiming as beneficiaries under Biney's will, challenged the defendant's right to administer Biney's estate, asserting their interest under customary law.
read moreJUDGMENT OF GRANVILLE SHARP J.A. The proceedings in the trial court before Adumua-Bossman, J. from whose decision this appeal was brought were instituted by originating summons pursuant to the provisions of Order 54, rule 4 of the Rules of the High Court. The relief sought was as follows: “(1) The interpretation of paragraph 12 of the will of J. E. Biney, deceased dated 11th August, 1936. (2) The interpretation of paragraph 11 of the Codicil to the said will dated 9th September, 1936. (3) And whether under the provisions of the said will and codicil the defendant as Administrator of the Estate of J. B. Apprey, deceased, is entitled to administer the estate of the said J. E. Biney (deceased).” Order 54, rule 4 provides inter alia that “An originating summons shall be in the Form No. 2, 3 or 5 Appendix K to these Rules, with such variations as circumstances may require.” The form used in the present case purported to be No. 2, which as printed in Appendix K conta...