MARIAN OBENG MINTAH vs. FRANCIS AMPENYIN [2015]DLSC3044

Date	2015-03-25
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/18/2013
Citation No.	[2015]DLSC3044

WOOD CJ (PRESIDING)

ADINYIRA (MRS) JSC

DOTSE JSC

BENIN JSC

AKAMBA JSC

JOSEPH E. K. ABEKAH ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT /APPELLANT.

KOJO KUM ESQ. WITH AKWASI GYIMAH- BOTA FOR THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT

[2015]DLSC3044
																																						<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" >MARIAN OBENG
MINTAH<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>FRANCIS
AMPENYIN<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp; [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">

CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/18/2013&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;&nbsp;&nbsp;
DATE: 25TH
MARCH, 2015<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>JOSEPH
E.&nbsp; K.&nbsp;
ABEKAH ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT /APPELLANT.<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">

&nbsp;KOJO KUM ESQ. WITH AKWASI GYIMAH- BOTA FOR THE
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;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">

WOOD CJ (PRESIDING) ADINYIRA (MRS) JSC, DOTSE JSC,
BENIN JSC, AND AKAMBA JSC<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>AKAMBA,
JSC:-<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;This is an appeal from the decision of the
Court of Appeal that reversed the decision of the trial High Court dismissing
the entire claims of the plaintiff, (herein after simply the appellant) and
granting the counterclaim of the defendant (hereinafter simply the respondent)
in the matter herein. <o:p></o:p>This case epitomizes a
love relationship that begun on a very high note only to become sour shortly
thereafter fizzling out all hopes of a blissful ever after. As recounted by the
Court of Appeal it all begun in October 2000 when the parties in this appeal
fell in love. There were promises apparently by the respondent to marry the
appellant, for so believed the appellant, which however did not materialize. Barely
two years thereafter, the relationship hit the rocks. The appellant who felt
shortchanged mounted an action in the High Court seeking damages for a breach
of promise to marry; damages for inconveniences and loss of time wasted on the
respondent; and payment of various sums specified in the statement of claim.
The respondent did not only deny the plaintiff’s claims but set up a counter
claim for recovery of possession of the house on plot No. 26 West Fijai Layout
Block F, Ntankoful, Sekondi; return of a pumping machine, louvre frames,
standing fan, gas cylinders and photographic camera. The trial court found no
merit in the appellant’s claims and so dismissed all of them and rather granted
the respondent’s counterclaim.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>On appeal, the Court of
Appeal found for the appellant that the respondent had made a promise to marry her
but later reneged on it. The Court also granted the appellant the sum of six
thousand Ghana Cedis (GH¢6000) as general damages to ameliorate her injured
feelings while it dismissed the rest of the grounds of appeal.<o:p></o:p>GROUNDS
OF APPEAL<o:p></o:p>Still not satisfied with
the Court of Appeal decision the appellant filed two main grounds for the
determination of this court. These are:<o:p></o:p>(i)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The Court erred in its evaluation of the
evidence on record on the contribution of the Plaintiff/Appellant on the house
and thereby came to a wrong decision that the Plaintiff/Appellant made no
substantial contribution.<o:p></o:p>(ii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The decision that the Plaintiff/Appellant
was in the property as a licensee was wrong in law and not supported by the
evidence on record particularly when it was a fact that the parties were in
concubinage relationship upon which the Appellant joined the Respondent in the
house and did business together for the improvement of the house besides the
Appellant’s personal contribution.<o:p></o:p>ANALYSIS<o:p></o:p>I commence my
consideration of the above stated grounds in reverse order. My simple reason is
that this ground of appeal that impugns the appellate court’s finding on the
capacity in which the appellant was or lived in the premises would affect any
consideration that would be made concerning whatever contribution she made hence
it is preferable that the capacity be given the first option of treatment. In what
capacity did the appellant make a ‘contribution’ and what was the purported contribution?
What justifications did the appellate court have for concluding that she was a licensee?
To begin with, the grou</main>