Ansong Vrs Gorman and Another [2011] GHASC 37 (30 December 2011)

Ansong Vrs Gorman and Another [2011] GHASC 37 (30 December 2011)

There was a valid and enforceable contract of sale as both appellants were aware of and consented to the transaction, evidenced by conduct and surrounding circumstances; parol evidence was properly admitted to explain the parties' intentions; specific performance was the appropriate remedy as damages were inadequate and the respondent had performed his obligations.

Citation
[2011] GHASC 37
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Eric Ansong; Defendant/appellant: Mr. Albert Gorman; Defendant/appellant: Mrs. Gorman
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
30 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decisions of High Court and Court of Appeal affirmed.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Parol Evidence Rule, Estoppel by Conduct, Sale of Land, Substantial Justice
Source Language
English
Contract Law Property Law Equity Specific Performance Parol Evidence Rule Estoppel by Conduct Sale of Land Substantial Justice

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eric Ansong

Plaintiff/respondent

Mr. Albert Gorman

Defendant/appellant

Mrs. Gorman

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a valid contract of sale between the parties given joint ownership and signature issues.
  2. 2 Whether parol or extrinsic evidence could be admitted to alter or explain the written contract.
  3. 3 Whether the remedy of specific performance was available to the respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

There was a valid and enforceable contract of sale as both appellants were aware of and consented to the transaction, evidenced by conduct and surrounding circumstances; parol evidence was properly admitted to explain the parties' intentions; specific performance was the appropriate remedy as damages were inadequate and the respondent had performed his obligations.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decisions of High Court and Court of Appeal affirmed.

Orders

  • Specific performance of the agreement for sale of the house granted in favour of the plaintiff/respondent.
  • Defendants/appellants compelled to execute the contract of sale and convey the property to the plaintiff/respondent.