[2012]DLSC2608 • February 22, 2012 • Supreme Court •
GLADYS MENSAH vs. STEPHEN MENSAH
The parties, married under customary law in 1989 and converted to a marriage under the Ordinance, acquired substantial assets during their marriage. The marriage broke down due to infidelity by the Respondent, who moved in with another woman. The Petitioner filed for divorce and claimed equal share in the jointly acquired properties and assets, including multiple houses, vehicles, land, shares, and business interests. Evidence showed the Petitioner actively contributed to the family business and acquisition of properties, despite the Respondent's denial. The trial court and Court of Appeal found in favor of the Petitioner, recognizing her substantial contribution and joint ownership of the properties.
read moreJONES DOTSE JSC; Lord Denning in his book, “Landmarks in the Law” Butterworths, 1954, writes at page 176 “on change in attitude of the British people to Divorce” as follows: “There is no longer any binding knot for marriage. There is only a loose piece of string which the parties can untie at will. Divorce is not a stigma. It has become respectable. One parent families abound.” The above quotation can equally be said to be applicable to the Ghanaian society as well. In the instant case since the parties are not contesting the issue of divorce, but only devolution of property acquired during the subsistence of the marriage upon divorce, we will focus our attention to those issues. What then are the facts in this case? In view of the importance that this court attaches to the legal and constitutional issues determinable in this case, we have considered it worthwhile to narrate in great detail, not only the facts of the case, but the reasons behind the trial court decis...