NORA OTOO AND OTHERS vs. REUBEN OTOO AND OTHERS

The case concerns the interpretation of the Will of Edward Kabu Otoo dated 9 February 1944, who died in May 1944. The Will made specific devises of various properties and established a banking account for proceeds from certain properties. The dispute arose over the ownership and entitlement to income from properties listed in clauses 5, 6, 7, and 8 of the Will, particularly whether the properties not specifically devised were intended to be held jointly by certain named sons. The plaintiffs, grandchildren of the testator, claimed entitlement to income and sought recovery of funds wrongfully collected by defendants who represented themselves as family heads. The High Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, but the Court of Appeal reversed this decision, leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court.

DOTSE JSC; This is an appeal by the Plaintiffs/Respondents/Appellants, hereafter referred to as the Plaintiffs against the judgment of the Court of Appeal dated 23rd May 2013 in favour of the Defendants/Appellants/Respondents, which set aside the decision of the High Court as per the judgment of Ofosu-Quartey J dated 26th day of October 2009. Since this is an appeal which touches and concerns the construction of a WILL, I intend to commence the delivery of this judgment by reference to an old English case in which the Master of the Rolls laid down some general rules of construction in the celebrated English case of Thelluson v Woodford, (1798) 4. VES. 227, 329 E.R. 117, 167 also referred to by the Learned Author of Modern Law of Succession in Ghana, A.K.P. Kludze, page 83, in which a rule on the construction of Wills was laid down by the court in the following terms:- “I know only one general rule of construction, equally for courts of Equity and Courts of Law, applicable.....