OBED HOYAH -VRS- NAA KWARLEY QAURTEY [2020] GHACA 13 (30 July 2020)

OBED HOYAH -VRS- NAA KWARLEY QAURTEY [2020] GHACA 13 (30 July 2020)

The Court of Appeal held that the High Court erred in awarding GH¢150,000 as financial provision, as it was unreasonable given the parties' circumstances, the short duration of the marriage, absence of children, and the Appellant's ongoing obligations to another wife and children. The award was reduced to GH¢40,000. The distribution of properties acquired during the marriage (NTHC houses, Odumase plots, shares) on a 50:50 basis was affirmed, while the Petitioner was denied a share in the Okpoi Gonno house acquired before marriage.

Citation
[2020] GHACA 13
Parties
Respondent/appellant: Obed Hoyah; Petitioner/respondent: Naa Kwarley Quartey
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
30 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Matrimonial/family Law / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part
Legal Topics
Dissolution of Customary Marriage, Distribution of Matrimonial Property, Financial Provision on Divorce, Polygamous Marriage, Customary Law
Source Language
English
Family Law Dissolution of Customary Marriage Distribution of Matrimonial Property Financial Provision on Divorce Polygamous Marriage Customary Law

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Obed Hoyah

Respondent/appellant

Naa Kwarley Quartey

Petitioner/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Matrimonial/family Law / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the distribution of matrimonial property and financial provision ordered by the High Court was just and equitable under a polygamous customary marriage
  2. 2 Whether the Petitioner was entitled to a share of properties acquired before and during the marriage
  3. 3 Whether the financial provision of GH¢150,000 awarded to the Petitioner was reasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the High Court erred in awarding GH¢150,000 as financial provision, as it was unreasonable given the parties' circumstances, the short duration of the marriage, absence of children, and the Appellant's ongoing obligations to another wife and children. The award was reduced to GH¢40,000. The distribution of properties acquired during the marriage (NTHC houses, Odumase plots, shares) on a 50:50 basis was affirmed, while the Petitioner was denied a share in the Okpoi Gonno house acquired before marriage.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part

Orders

  • Lump sum financial provision of GH¢150,000 set aside and replaced with GH¢40,000 in favor of Petitioner
  • Four Odumase plots to be shared 50:50 between parties