ANKOMAH-SEY vs. EMBRA-QUANSAH [1971]DLCA2077

Date	1971-07-05
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1971]DLCA2077

AZU CRABBE J.S.C

LASSEY JA

SOWAH J.A.

A. K. B. AMPIAH FOR THE APPELLANT.

K. A. SARPONG FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1971]DLCA2077
																																						<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" >ANKOMAH-SEY <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>EMBRA-QUANSAH <o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL]<o:p></o:p>&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;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1971] 2 GLR 274<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">

DATE:
5 JULY 1971.<o:p></o:p>

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

A. K. B.
AMPIAH FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

K. A.
SARPONG FOR THE RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

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

AZU CRABBE J.S.C., LASSEY AND SOWAH
JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF AZU CRABBE J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>This is
an appeal from the decision of the late Owusu J. whereby he declared that the
respondent, as the customary successor, was alone entitled to the grant of
letters of administration in respect of the estate of the late George Edward
William Quansah (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) of Cape Coast, who
died intestate at Tema on 20 January 1968.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
proceedings in this case were commenced on 6 August 1968 with the filing in the
High Court, Cape Coast, by the respondent of an originating summons under the
Supreme [High] Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (L.N. 140A,), Order 54, r. 4
for the determination of the following questions:<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">“(i) The
interpretation of section 48 (1) of the Marriage Ordinance, Cap. 127 (1951
Rev.);<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">&nbsp;(ii) ‘Whether leaving a widow or husband or
any issue of such marriage’ means such marriage contracted under the Ordinance
alone or it embraces marriage contracted under customary law. <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">(iii) If
the interpretation of the said section means marriage under the Ordinance
alone, whether in the instant case, the applicant as the brother and the person
validly appointed as successor to George Edward William Quansah deceased, under
native law and custom, is not the proper person entitled to a grant of letters
of administration to administer the said estate in preference to the caveatrix
Christina Ankoma-Sey, who is an issue of customary law marriage.”<o:p></o:p>On 27
August 1968 the appellant entered a caveat, and on 25 November 1968 the
respondent in pursuance of Order 54, r. 6 (1) filed a notice of appointment to
hear the originating summons. Subsequently pleadings were ordered and filed,
and the issues agreed upon for trial were formulated 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">“Whether
or not the case should not be set down for legal argument as to which of the
parties should be granted letters of administration since the defendant
caveated on her own behalf and on behalf of her brothers and sister and since
the plaintiff on the pleadings having admitted that the intestate during his
lifetime contracted a valid marriage under the Marriage Ordinance of the Gold
Coast (now Ghana) and having also admitted on the pleadings that the defendant
and her said brothers and sister are the children of the intestate born out of
a valid customary marriage.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The facts
are not in dispute, but the contest between the parties is whether the
respondent, who claims as the customary successor of the deceased, is the one
entitled to the grant of letters of administration or the appellant, who claims
to represent all the children of the deceased. The following statement of the relevant
facts are taken from the judgment of Owusu J.:<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
plaintiff is the customary successor of the late George Edward William Quansah,
and the defendant the daughter of the said George Edward William Quansah,
deceased. During the lifetime of t</main>