RE ASANTE, OWUSU vs. ASANTE [1993]DLSC4892

Date	1993-12-14
Suit No.	[1992-93] 2 G B R 462 – 507
Citation No.	[1993]DLSC4892

ADADE JSC

ABBAN JSC

AMUA-SEKYI JSC

WIREDU JSC

BAMFORD-ADDO JSC

HAYFRON-BENJAMIN JSC

AMPIAH JSC

D O LAMPTEY FOR THE APPELLANT.

AMEGATCHER WITH HIM KPATSA BOAFO (MISS) AND ARYEE FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1993]DLSC4892
																																						<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" >RE ASANTE, OWUSU<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ASANTE<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME
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">

[1992-93] 2 G B R 462 – 507&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: 14 DECEMBER 1993<o:p></o:p>

AMEGATCHER,
WITH HIM, KPATSA, BOAFO (MISS) AND ARYEE 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 1.0pt 0in">

ADADE
JSC, ABBAN JSC, AMUA-SEKYI JSC, WIREDU JSC, BAMFORD-ADDO JSC, HAYFRON-BENJAMIN
JSC, AMPIAH JSC<o:p></o:p>

</div>ADADE JSC.<o:p></o:p>Major
(rtd) Kwame Asante died on 3/4/90. A few months afterwards the surviving
spouse, Letitia Asante, and the eldest son, Yaw Asante, applied to the High
Court, Accra for letters to administer the estate of the deceased. Madam Mary
Owusu, described as a concubine or a girlfriend of the deceased, applied to be
joined as a co-grantee in the interest of her two children with the deceased,
both of whom are minors. The customary successor, Philip Asante, also applied
to be joined in his capacity as the successor. The latter’s application was not
opposed but that of Mary Owusu was fiercely contested especially by Letitia
Asante, the spouse. On 14/6/91, the High Court granted the letters of
administration to all four applicants jointly.<o:p></o:p>Yaw
Asante and Letitia Asante appealed to the Court of Appeal against the order of
the High Court claiming principally that Mary Owusu had no locus standi in the
proceedings and ought not to have been joined to the grant. Philip Asante did
not appeal. Yaw Asante is said to have withdrawn his appeal on 15/2/92, nine
days prior to the hearing of the appeal on 24/2/92, so that only Letitia Asante
remained as the appellant in the Court of Appeal. In its judgment on 2/4/92,
the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and removed Mary Owusu from the grant.
The present appeal is by Mary Owusu against the decision of the Court of
Appeal. The respondent to this appeal is Letitia Asante, the spouse.<o:p></o:p>The
case presents an interesting mix of facts, all of which are common ground.
These may be briefly stated as follows:<o:p></o:p>(1)
The deceased, Major Kwame Asante, died intestate on 3/4/90.<o:p></o:p>(2)
The deceased is survived by: (a) a spouse, Mrs Letitia Asante, (b) nine
children, (c) a parent, the deceased’s own mother, Madam Akua Asantewa and of
course, (d) members of his extended family.<o:p></o:p>(3)
The deceased left properties both inside and outside Ghana.<o:p></o:p>For
the sake of the record and for a proper appreciation of this opinion, I
hereunder reproduce the names of the nine children, together with their ages as
at the date of death of their father, in so far as these are indicated in the
record before us, as follows:<o:p></o:p>(i)
Yaw Asante<o:p></o:p>(ii)
Jacqueline Asante (22)<o:p></o:p>(iii)
William A Asante<o:p></o:p>(iv)
Nana Agyeiwaa Asante<o:p></o:p>(v)
Julian Asante<o:p></o:p>(vi)
Madeline Asante (15)<o:p></o:p>(vii)
Gerald Asante (12)<o:p></o:p>(viii)
Kobby Asante (10)<o:p></o:p>(ix)
Amanda Asante (8)<o:p></o:p>Of
these, Letitia has three, two, or may be all three, of whom are minors. Their
identities are not known, but it seems that Gerald Asante (12) is one of them.
Madeline Asante (15) has a different mother; Kobby Asante (10), and Amanda
Asante (8) are children of Mary Owusu, the caveatrix. The remaining three children,
including Yaw Asante, may belong to one mother. Yaw Asante is the eldest of all
the children of the deceased.<o:p></o:p>Of
the members of the deceased’s extended family two were identified in these
proceedings are Philip Asante, described as the brother and the customary
successor to the deceased, and Nana Owusu Sampa who is the head of the
deceased’s family.<o:p></o:p>Before
embarking on the merits of the appeal, I would like to take this opportunity to
comment on a matter of some concern. The impression has been created that
whoever gets a grant of letters of administration becomes entitled beneficially
to the estate of the intestate. This appears to have accounted for the
eagerness with which persons vie with one another for letters of
administration, leading to interminable disputes and litigation. I am afraid
the courts, by their pronouncements and general attitude to administration
actions, have contributed in no small measure to creating this impression.
There is nothing farther from the truth. A grant of letters of administration
only entitles the grantee to administer the estate; it does not give him any
beneficial interest whatever in the estate, which he does not otherwise have.<o:p></o:p>A
grant in fact imposes on the grantee, not privileges, but legal obligations of
a serious character, failure to discharge which may lead to grave consequences.<o:p></o:p>