Dawuni and Another Vrs Dasana [2018] GHASC 30 (23 May 2018)

Dawuni and Another Vrs Dasana [2018] GHASC 30 (23 May 2018)

The Supreme Court held that under Nanum custom, nomination for Bimbilla Na is by the appropriate family, selection is by the council of kingmakers (not solely the Juo Na), and enskinment is performed by the Kpatihi Na. The 1st petitioner was not of the right lineage (being a maternal great grandson) and thus not qualified. The 1st defendant was properly nominated, selected, and enskinned. The lower committees made no errors of law or fact warranting reversal. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety.

Citation
[2018] GHASC 30
Parties
Petitioner/appellant/appellant: Bimbilla Na, Salifu Dawuni (substituted by Sagnarigu Lana Shani Azumah); Petitioner/appellant/appellant: Juo Regent, Osman Mahama; Respondent/respondent/respondent: Andani Dasana (substituted by Nyelinborgu Naa Yakubu Andani Dasana); Respondent/respondent/respondent: Azumah Natogma
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
23 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Chieftaincy Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Customary Succession, Nomination and Enskinment of Chiefs, Capacity to Sue in Chieftaincy Matters, Estoppel in Customary Law, Interpretation of Chieftaincy Act
Source Language
English
Chieftaincy Law Customary Law Customary Succession Nomination and Enskinment of Chiefs Capacity to Sue in Chieftaincy Matters Estoppel in Customary Law Interpretation of Chieftaincy Act

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bimbilla Na, Salifu Dawuni (substituted by Sagnarigu Lana Shani Azumah)

Petitioner/appellant/appellant

Juo Regent, Osman Mahama

Petitioner/appellant/appellant

Andani Dasana (substituted by Nyelinborgu Naa Yakubu Andani Dasana)

Respondent/respondent/respondent

Azumah Natogma

Respondent/respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

Chieftaincy Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Juo Na is the sole authority to nominate, select, and enskin Bimbilla Na under Nanum custom
  2. 2 Whether the 1st petitioner was validly nominated, selected, and enskinned as Bimbilla Na
  3. 3 Whether the 1st petitioner had the requisite lineage and qualification to ascend to the Bimbilla Skin

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that under Nanum custom, nomination for Bimbilla Na is by the appropriate family, selection is by the council of kingmakers (not solely the Juo Na), and enskinment is performed by the Kpatihi Na. The 1st petitioner was not of the right lineage (being a maternal great grandson) and thus not qualified. The 1st defendant was properly nominated, selected, and enskinned. The lower committees made no errors of law or fact warranting reversal. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed