ALIAS & ANOR VRS OKYERE & ANOR (J4/34/2023) [2024] GHASC 12 (28 February 2024)

ALIAS & ANOR VRS OKYERE & ANOR (J4/34/2023) [2024] GHASC 12 (28 February 2024)

The property was customarily gifted to all siblings and their mother; 1st defendant's registration and mortgage of the property was fraudulent and did not confer sole ownership; the divorce settlement transferring property to 2nd defendant was void as 1st defendant had no sole title; plaintiffs had capacity to sue; 2nd defendant was a licensee and forfeited rights by challenging title.

Citation
ALIAS & ANOR VRS OKYERE & ANOR (J4/34/2023) [2024] GHASC 12 (28 February 2024)
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/respondent: Hanna Okyere alias Abena Kwabua (deceased); Plaintiff/appellant/respondent: Jim Okyere alias Yaw Yeboah; 1st Defendant/respondent/appellant: James Okyere (deceased); 2nd Defendant/respondent/appellant: Florence Darko Okyere
Court
ghasc
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
28 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court)
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Customary Gift, Capacity to Sue, Joint Ownership, Divorce Settlement, Fraud, Licensee Rights, Mortgage, Equitable Reliefs
Source Language
eng
Property Law Family Law Customary Law Customary Gift Capacity to Sue Joint Ownership Divorce Settlement Fraud +3 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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hanna Okyere alias Abena Kwabua (deceased)

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent

Jim Okyere alias Yaw Yeboah

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent

James Okyere (deceased)

1st Defendant/respondent/appellant

Florence Darko Okyere

2nd Defendant/respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs had capacity to sue in respect of jointly owned property
  2. 2 Whether the property was validly gifted to all siblings and their mother or solely to 1st defendant
  3. 3 Whether the divorce settlement transferring property to 2nd defendant was valid

Ratio Decidendi

The property was customarily gifted to all siblings and their mother; 1st defendant's registration and mortgage of the property was fraudulent and did not confer sole ownership; the divorce settlement transferring property to 2nd defendant was void as 1st defendant had no sole title; plaintiffs had capacity to sue; 2nd defendant was a licensee and forfeited rights by challenging title.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Court of Appeal's setting aside of High Court orders affirmed
  • Five stores not reserved for 2nd defendant; property remains for benefit of all donees