[1980]DLHC2138 • May 23, 1980 • High Court
IN RE DUNCAN (DECD); DUNCAN vs. DUNCAN
The plaintiff, daughter of the deceased Mrs. Mary Dede Obaamra Duncan, claimed to be the proper person to be granted letters of administration with will annexed for the deceased's estate. The defendant, the plaintiff's full-blood brother, challenged the validity of the will dated 18 December 1975 on grounds of improper execution and the mental incapacity of the testatrix. The will was prepared by Mr. Daniel A. Boye, a legal practitioner. The plaintiff alleged the testatrix was mentally alert and possessed a disposing mind at the time of making the will. The defendant contended that the testatrix was senile and incapable of understanding the will, and that the will was not duly executed according to legal requirements.
read moreJUDGMENT OF KORANTENG-ADDOW J. The plaintiff’s claim is that she is the proper person to be granted letters of administration with will annexed in respect of the will of the late Mrs. Mary Dede Obaamra Duncan. The defendant challenges the validity of the will on the ground that it was not duly executed. The main issues which fall to be decided therefore are whether the will is valid and whether or not administration cum testamento annexo should be granted to the plaintiff. The plaintiff is the daughter of the testatrix; the defendant is the brother of the plaintiff of the full blood. The will which is being contested is dated 18 December 1975; and it was drawn up by Mr. Daniel A. Boye, a legal practitioner. No cause is shown in the writ or statement of claim why the plaintiff should be granted letters of administration with the will annexed. The indorsement on the writ merely reads: “The plaintiff’s claim is that she is the proper person to be granted letters of administrati...