QUIST vs. GEORGE [1973]DLHC2312

Date	1973-07-30
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1973]DLHC2312

ABBAN J.

CROMWELL QUIST FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

JOE REINDORF FOR THE DEFENDANT.

[1973]DLHC2312
																																						<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">QUIST <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">GEORGE <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1974] GLR 1<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

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"> 30 JULY 1973.<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">

<a name="_gjdgxs"></a>CROMWELL QUIST FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p>

JOE
REINDORF FOR THE DEFENDANT.<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">

ABBAN J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ABBAN J.<o:p></o:p>In this
action the plaintiff is asking for a declaration that the defendant is a bare
licensee of a piece of land situate and lying at North Christiansborg, Labadi
Road, Accra, and on which has been built a hospital popularly known as the
Salem Hospital.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
daughter of the plaintiff was married to the defendant under the Marriage
Ordinance, Cap 127 (1951 Rev.), and even though they are no longer living
together, the marriage is still subsisting. They separated in September 1969,
after they had lived as man and wife for 26 years. The cause of the separation
does not appear to be very relevant to the present case, except that the
present dispute seemed to have arisen immediately after the said separation had
taken place. For the sake of clarity, the wife of the defendant will be
referred to as the daughter.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiff’s case<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff, some time before 1959, owned the land in dispute. She alleged that
in 1954, her daughter refused to live with the defendant because the defendant
was having an affair with another woman and had even had a child with the said
woman. The daughter is the only child of the plaintiff and the daughter has
never had a child. The plaintiff and her late husband, Sir Emmanuel Quist,
interceded in the dispute between the daughter and the defendant over the
defendant’s affair with that woman. The defendant realised that he was in the
wrong, and therefore apologised to the daughter, the plaintiff and the
plaintiff’s late husband. Apart from the apology, the defendant also denied
being the father of the said child.<o:p></o:p>After the
matter had been settled, the daughter went back to live with the defendant. At
that time, the defendant, who is a doctor by profession, was working at the
Korle Bu Hospital.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiff said the defendant later went back on his word and claimed that,
after all, he was the father of the said child. This greatly upset the
plaintiff’s daughter, and it was from that time that the plaintiff felt she had
to take steps to provide the daughter with an independent means of income. The
plaintiff thought this would, in a way, give the daughter some hope and
comfort. The daughter is the only child of the plaintiff and naturally the
plaintiff must have had special affection for her. Indeed, the plaintiff was at
all material times anxious to give the daughter every comfort and the best that
the plaintiff could afford. So, for natural love and affection, the land in
dispute was gifted by the plaintiff to the daughter and a deed of gift, exhibit
1, dated 27 February 1959, was executed to evidence the said gift.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
daughter, some months after the execution of exhibit 1, mortgaged the land to
the Barclays Bank to secure a loan granted to her husband (the defendant) by
the said bank. With this loan, the defendant put up the Salem Hospital on the
land. When the plaintiff got to know of what was going on on the land, she said
she was not pleased. But, in order not to offend her daughter, she kept quiet
and never interfered. She never went near the hospital until some time in 1964
when she went there to visit a patient. She further alleged that some time in
September 1969, the defendant unreasonably forced the daughter out of the
matrimonial home. The daughter had nowhere to go, and as a mother she was
morally obliged to offer the daughter accommodation. The plaintiff had a house
at Osu Russia, Accra, which was at that time fetching the plaintiff ¢300.00 a
month as rent.<o:p></o:p>