<p class="mb-5" id="contentDlCitation" hidden>[1992]DLSC4901</p> <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: 18px !important;"><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";color:#00B0F0">AKUFO ADDO<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";color:#00B0F0">CATHELINE AND ANOTHER<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">[SUPREME COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p></span></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="text-align:center;line-height:115%; border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in; mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">[1992 – 1993] 3 G B R 937 - 1022 DATE: 27 JANUARY 1992<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">JOE REINDORF (WITH HIM ADUMUA-BOSSMAN) FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p></span></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" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%;border:none; mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">E D KOM, SAG (WITH CHARLES HAYIBOR, GEORGE KOM AND R AGODZO) FOR THE RESPONDENTS.<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">CORAM:<o:p></o:p></span></b></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" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%;border:none; mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">WUAKU JSC, AMUA-SEKYI JSC, OSEI-HWERE JSC, KPEGAH JA, OFORI-BOATENG JA<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">KPEGAH JA. <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">This appeal came to us from a judgment of the Court of Appeal, setting aside the decision of the High Court dated 27 January 1992. On 1 October 1982, the plaintiff took out a writ of summons against the defendants claiming the following reliefs:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">“(a) A declaration that the shares held by the late Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta (deceased) in Beyeeman Freezing Company Limited were held by him upon trust for the late husband of the plaintiff or (b) Further or other reliefs as in the circumstances may be just.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The claim was said to have been amended to include a claim to the ownership of house No 1203, Kaneshie Housing Estate Accra. The plaintiff, Mrs Adeline Akufo-Addo, is the widow of the late Edward Akufo-Addo, onetime Chief Justice of this country and later its President. The plaintiff’s action is against the executors of the will of one Ofori-Atta, a brother of the full blood of the plaintiff. By his will, Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta, who died in a tragic lorry accident, devised certain shares in Beyeeman Freezing Company Limited of which he was the Managing Director, and house No 1203, Kaneshie Estate, Accra as the absolute and beneficial owner, to his children. The plaintiff disputes that the properties belong to her deceased brother and contends that although he held the legal title to these properties, he was a trustee for her late husband, Edward Akufo-Addo, for the benefit of his estate. According to the plaintiff, the trust was created by operation of law.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The plaintiff and her witnesses gave evidence on the basis of her claim. Documents were also tendered by her. According to the plaintiff, her brother, Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta, who was then unemployed, joined her in Accra in 1941. She found a job for him as a clerk at the Barclays Bank, where he worked until 1946. Her brother asked her to plead with her late husband to assist him do business, where he had had some experience. Her husband agreed to the proposal and got one Amua-Sekyi and Ofori-Atta together and registered a company called Linasek. The working capital of this company was provided by her late husband. The company traded in suiting materials, the speciality of Mr Amua-Sekyi. Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta was fond of giving credit to customers. This practice was unacceptable to Mr Amua-Sekyi who found it inconvenient to be going round debt collecting. He therefore withdrew from the company. This occurred in 1954.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">Linasek was taken over by Edwards Limited which also collapsed as a result of the mismanagement of Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta. Edwards Limited folded up in 1957. Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta had a brief sojourn in the Volta Region and resurfaced with a proposal to the plaintiff’s late husband that he wanted to go into a sand and stone business. The Tema Harbour was then under construction. A company, the Akan General Construction Co, was registered and the plaintiff’s husband bought trucks on hire-purchase for the business. At the same time, one M K Apaloo also approached the plaintiff’s husband with the same suggestion; so he bought eight tipper trucks, four of which were given to Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta and the other four to Modesto Apaloo. This business also went the way the others did, it collapsed. Meanwhile, Apaloo was arrested and his vehicles were said to have been given to the plaintiff’s brother for his sand and stone business. After the collapse of Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta’s business, he sold all the eight vehicles, paid a deposit on the Kaneshie house and invested the rest of the proceeds in Okumkom Cold Store. This business flourished. Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta was said to have invested part of the monies realised from the operations of Okumkom in Beyeeman Freezing Company Ltd. The bulk of the money however, came from bank loans, which were secured with the Ringway Hotel, the property of the plaintiff’s husband. Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta had 97.5% of the shares in Beyeeman Freezing Co Ltd. The other shareholder was the plaintiff’s daughter called Dora. She had 2.5% of the shares.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The plaintiff’s contention is that both the Kaneshie house and the shares in Beyeeman Freezing Co Ltd were held on trust by the late Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta for the late President Akufo-Addo. The plaintiff based her claim on the equitable principle of tracing of assets upon a breach of trust and accuses her brother, Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta, of fraudulently selling the eight trucks and investing the proceeds in the Kaneshie house, Okumkom Enterprises and Beyeeman Freezing Co Ltd. Of course, the defendants who are executors of the will of Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta deny the plaintiff’s claims and contend that the deceased, Ofori-Panin Ofori-Atta acquired the properties through dint of hard work.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The learned trial judge found for the plaintiff against the defendants and ordered that the 1,950 shares held in Beyeeman Freezing Company Limited be registered in the name of the plaintiff as the holder of the legal title. The learned trial judge also decreed that the plaintiff was the absolute owner of house No 1203, Kaneshie Estate Accra and dismissed the counterclaim of the defendants. Aggrieved by the judgment, the defendants appealed to the Court of Appeal, which reversed and set aside the judgment of the trial court.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The plaintiff then mounted before this court the instant appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal. Fundamental to this appeal is the issue of what claim the plaintiff can be said to have put up in the High Court for which judgment could be pronounced for her. It is therefore essential that I identify what claims the parties have submitted to the court for adjudication before attempting to consider the other issues raised in the appeal, more importantly the merits of the case. In trying to identify the issues that the parties submitted for adjudication, I will in the process, be dealing with, and disposing of, some of the grounds of appeal.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">After taking out her writ of summons on 1/10/82, the plaintiff followed it up on 6/10/82 with a statement of claim in which she adumbrated the basis of her claim against the defendants.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">In paragraph 15 of the said statement of claim, the plaintiff repeated the claims endorsed on the writ of summons as</main>
