AYISHETU ABDUL-KADIRI vs. ABDULAI DWAMENA [2020]DLCA10013

Date	2020-11-26
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO.: H1/207/2015
DL Citation No.	[2020]DLCA10013

• EDWARD OPPONG FOR THE RESPONDENT/APPELLANT

• NASHIRU YUSSIF FOR THE PETITIONER/RESPONDENT

• EDWARD OPPONG FOR THE RESPONDENT/APPELLANT

[2020]DLCA10013
 <div class="restriction-wrapper">
 <div class="container-lg">
 <div class="row">
 <div class="col-lg-12 restricted-content">
 <div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
 <div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
 <img class=""
 src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
 alt="Subscription based content">
 </div>
 </div>
 <a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login" class="btn btn-primary btn-lg" style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> Login to Read Full Case </a>
 
 </div>
 </div>
 </div>
 </div>
 <main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" >AYISHETU ABDUL-KADIRI<o:p></o:p>(PETITIONER/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ABDULAI DWAMENA<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

CIVIL
APPEAL NO.: H1/207/2015&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; DATE:&nbsp; 26TH NOVEMBER, 2020<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>NASHIRU YUSSIF FOR
THE PETITIONER/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

EDWARD
OPPONG FOR THE RESPONDENT/APPELLANT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>B. ACKAH-YENSU JA
(PRESIDING), AMMA GAISIE JA, OBENG-MANU JNR. JA<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="text-align:center;border:none;
mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;<a name="_Hlk13039370">B. ACKAH-YENSU, JA<o:p></o:p></a>BACKGROUND FACTS<o:p></o:p>The matters that have
given rise to the instant appeal are briefly that the Petitioner/Respondent
herein filed a Petition for divorce seeking the following reliefs:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; “a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the said marriage be dissolved.<o:p></o:p>b)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That Petitioner be given the 2nd
Plot of land and all the structures on it.<o:p></o:p>c)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the Petitioner be given her
interest by way of contribution in the first house that is the matrimonial
home.<o:p></o:p>d)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Any other order as the Court may deem
fit”.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The
Respondent/Appellant filed an Answer and also cross-petitioned as follows:<o:p></o:p>“a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Respondent cross-petition for the
dissolution of the marriage and says that the petitioner is not entitled to
financial settlement because she is the cause of the break-down of the
marriage.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;In this delivery,
they shall be referred to as Petitioner and Respondent respectively as in the
trial court.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;On 6th
September 1987, the Parties herein celebrated a customary marriage under the
Customary Marriage and Divorce (Registration) Law (1985) at the Accra
Metropolitan Assembly.&nbsp;&nbsp; Whereas in the
Petitioner’s Petition for divorce filed at the trial court on 6th
January 2009, she asserted that they were married under the Marriage of
Mohammedans Ordinance, Cap 129 (1951 Rev.), from the record of appeal, there is
no evidence of compliance with the provisions of Cap 129 as asserted by the Petitioner.&nbsp; That type of marriage has essential
characteristics for its validity:<o:p></o:p>(i)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Was it celebrated and officiated by a
licensed Imam?<o:p></o:p>(ii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Did the Imam issue a certificate?<o:p></o:p>That said, there is no doubt
from the evidence that the Parties were in a customary marriage.&nbsp; Notwithstanding the absence of any such
evidence regarding the marriage under Cap 129, it is not in dispute that they
are Muslims by faith and having married under Customary Law, their marriage was
potentially polygamous.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The marriage between the
Parties has since been dissolved on 26th November, 2010 on the
grounds that the marriage had broken down beyond reconciliation.&nbsp; At the time of the dissolution of the
marriage between the Parties, the Respondent had three (3) wives including the
Petitioner herein.&nbsp; Apart from the one
child with the Petitioner, who is now an adult of about 20 years, the
Respondent has five (5) other children with the other two (2) wives.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;As </main>