Tackie & Anor Vrs Nettey & Anor [2021] GHASC 167 (24 March 2021)

Tackie & Anor Vrs Nettey & Anor [2021] GHASC 167 (24 March 2021)

The plaintiffs failed to prove legal ownership or beneficial interest in the disputed property as Maria House was not devised in the wills of James Hansen Sackey or Samuel Quao Sackey, nor included in any valid vesting assent. The evidence established that Afua Sackey made a valid Samansiw (customary law will) in favour of her sister Abla Sackey, whose descendants (the 1st defendant's branch) have exercised long, exclusive possession and overt acts of ownership. The plaintiffs' claims of fraud were unsubstantiated, and the CDR arbitration was not binding as the 1st defendant's predecessors resiled before the award. The lower courts' concurrent findings were supported by the evidence and...

Citation
[2021] GHASC 167
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/appellant: Solomon Tackie; Plaintiff/appellant/appellant: Ago Bannerman; Defendant/respondent/respondent: John Nettey (substituted by Fred Bibi Ayimeh); Defendant/respondent/respondent: Sampson Kofi Badu
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
24 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Court of Appeal affirmed.
Legal Topics
Intestate Succession, Customary Law Will (samansiw), Capacity and Locus Standi, Fraud in Procurement of Judgment, Arbitration and Estoppel, Limitation of Actions
Source Language
English
Succession Law Customary Law Civil Procedure Intestate Succession Customary Law Will (samansiw) Capacity and Locus Standi Fraud in Procurement of Judgment Arbitration and Estoppel +1 more

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 6 Authorities cited 59 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Solomon Tackie

Plaintiff/appellant/appellant

Ago Bannerman

Plaintiff/appellant/appellant

John Nettey (substituted by Fred Bibi Ayimeh)

Defendant/respondent/respondent

Sampson Kofi Badu

Defendant/respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs established legal ownership or beneficial interest in the disputed property (Maria House) under the estate of Samuel Quao Sackey
  2. 2 Whether the judgments obtained by the 1st defendant in the District Court were procured by fraud
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs had capacity and locus standi to institute the suit

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs failed to prove legal ownership or beneficial interest in the disputed property as Maria House was not devised in the wills of James Hansen Sackey or Samuel Quao Sackey, nor included in any valid vesting assent. The evidence established that Afua Sackey made a valid Samansiw (customary law will) in favour of her sister Abla Sackey, whose descendants (the 1st defendant's branch) have exercised long, exclusive possession and overt acts of ownership. The plaintiffs' claims of fraud were unsubstantiated, and the CDR arbitration was not binding as the 1st defendant's predecessors resiled before the award. The lower courts' concurrent findings were supported by the evidence and...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Court of Appeal affirmed.