BUXTON vs. APPIAH AND ANOTHER [1961]DLHC5397

Date	1961-10-25
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1961]DLHC5397

OLLENNU J.

S. M. CODJOE FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

DEFENDANTS IN PERSON.

[1961]DLHC5397
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-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" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">BUXTON <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">vs. <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">APPIAH AND ANOTHER<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">&nbsp;[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">[1961] GLR 601&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;DATE:<span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0"> 25TH OCTOBER, 1961.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

S.
M. CODJOE FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

OLLENNU, J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF
OLLENNU, J.<o:p></o:p>In this originating summons, the court is called upon to
interprete clause 12 of the will of the late David William Buxton, deceased who
died on the 10th June, 1959. The will is dated the 3rd June, 1959, and probate
thereof was granted on the 15th August, 1959, to the defendants herein, the
executors named in the said will. The said clause 12 of the will reads as
follows:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“12 There are outstanding debts to be collected the receipts of
which are with me, these must all be collected by my son James Ashiefie Buxton
for his own use”.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The interpretation which the court is invited to place upon the
words “outstanding debts to be collected the receipts of which are with me” is:
all debts whatsoever due on any receipts or promissory notes which were found
among the testator’s personal effects after his death.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It was submitted on behalf of the plaintiff that these words used
by the testator are clear and unambiguous on their face and must therefore be
given their ordinary meaning, and be construed as required by the plaintiff.
The court was referred to Odgers on Construction of Deeds and Statutes, (3rd
ed.), pages 29 and 56 as laying down this principle. At page 29 the principle
is stated as follows:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“The plain ordinary meaning of the words used is to be adopted in
construing a document. The subject matter may show, however, that the words
have a meaning different from the plain, ordinary or popular meaning, if they
are used in connection with usage of a trade or profession and have thus some
special, technical meaning. They may even be used in a special or peculiar
sense on a particular occasion if this construction would effect the intention
of the parties as collected from the document. Also if the plain, ordinary
meaning of the words would lead to some absurdity or inconsistency with other
expressions in the document, this plain, ordinary meaning may be modified in
order to avoid the absurdity or render the different parts of the document
consistent”.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Again words which on their face, standing alone by themselves, are
plain and unambiguous, may become ambiguous or absurd when read together with
other parts of the document, or when considered along with surrounding
circumstances. In such a case there is a latent ambiguity and the words used
should not be interpreted in their pure literal meaning. At page 59 of Odgers
on Construction of Deeds and Statutes, the learned author said:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“In a latent ambiguity or equivocation the difficulty is not
discovered till evidence as to the literal meaning of the words used and as to
the circumstances of the parties at the time the document was executed, in fact
all the evidence admissible to resolve a patent ambiguity, is exhausted. The
ambiguity still remains.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>