IN RE ARMAH (DECD); ARMAH vs. ARMAH

The appellant, the only child of the deceased Wallace Amako Cofie Armah who died intestate on 5 December 1980, applied for letters of administration to manage his late father's estate. The respondent, the widow and stepmother of the appellant, caveated the application. Due to failure to agree on who should be granted letters of administration, the High Court ordered the appellant to issue a writ of summons to determine the issue. The trial court also considered whether the deceased owned one or two houses and which law applied to the estate distribution: the Intestate Succession Law, 1985 (PNDCL 111) or the Marriage Ordinance, Cap 127. The trial judge found the deceased owned one house, applied PNDCL 111, and refused to grant letters to either party due to their bitter feud, appointing the Administrator-General instead. The appellant appealed this decision.

The plaintiff-appellant (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) is the only child of Wallace Amako Cofie Armah who died intestate in Accra on 5 December 1980. The defendant-respondent (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) is the widow of the said deceased and the stepmother of the appellant. The respondent had been married under the Marriage Ordinance, Cap 127 (1951 Rev). on or about 23 June 1986 the appellant applied for letters of administration to administer the estate of his late father. The respondent caveated. As the parties had failed to come to an agreement as to who should be granted the letters of administration,’the High Court, Accra acting under Order 60, r 21(2) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (LN 140A), ordered that the appellant should issue a writ of summons for the determination of the issue. He did. At the trial of the action the court was called upon to determine not only the main issue of who should be granted the letters of administratio.....