KYEREMAH VRS ARHIN (C4/01/2015) [2024] GHACC 103 (27 February 2024)

KYEREMAH VRS ARHIN (C4/01/2015) [2024] GHACC 103 (27 February 2024)

The marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation due to persistent irreconcilable differences, evidenced by repeated failed reconciliation attempts by family and community leaders. The petitioner is entitled to a 40% share in house H 88/6 Brigade Techiman based on substantial contribution before marriage, but not to alimony as she is self-employed and no evidence of need was established. The respondent failed to prove entitlement to return of household items or monetary compensation.

Citation
KYEREMAH VRS ARHIN (C4/01/2015) [2024] GHACC 103 (27 February 2024)
Parties
Petitioner: Regina Afia Kyeremah; Respondent: Arhin Denis
Court
ghacc
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
27 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Divorce Petition With Ancillary Reliefs / Final Judgment
Outcome
Petition granted; marriage dissolved; property divided; monetary claims dismissed; cross petition dismissed.
Legal Topics
Customary Marriage Dissolution, Division of Property, Alimony, Ancillary Reliefs
Source Language
eng
Family Law Property Law Customary Marriage Dissolution Division of Property Alimony Ancillary Reliefs

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina Afia Kyeremah

Petitioner

Arhin Denis

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Petition With Ancillary Reliefs / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the customary marriage between the parties has broken down beyond reconciliation
  2. 2 Whether the petitioner is entitled to a share in house H 88/6 Brigade Techiman
  3. 3 Whether the petitioner is entitled to alimony

Ratio Decidendi

The marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation due to persistent irreconcilable differences, evidenced by repeated failed reconciliation attempts by family and community leaders. The petitioner is entitled to a 40% share in house H 88/6 Brigade Techiman based on substantial contribution before marriage, but not to alimony as she is self-employed and no evidence of need was established. The respondent failed to prove entitlement to return of household items or monetary compensation.

Court Disposition

Petition granted; marriage dissolved; property divided; monetary claims dismissed; cross petition dismissed.

Orders

  • Customary marriage between the parties is dissolved.
  • Petitioner awarded 40% interest in house H 88/6 Brigade Hansua Techiman; respondent awarded 60%.