Konadu Vrs Rasheed [2020] GHASC 136 (18 November 2020)

Konadu Vrs Rasheed [2020] GHASC 136 (18 November 2020)

Exhibit 'E' was not a valid conveyance as it was not witnessed or attested and could not transfer property, including company property, to the petitioner. All properties acquired during the marriage, regardless of whose name they are in, are to be shared equally between the parties. The Kumasi, Adum House belongs to the jointly owned company and not exclusively to the petitioner.

Citation
[2020] GHASC 136
Parties
Petitioner/respondent/appellant: Nana Yaa Konadu; Respondent/appellant/respondent: Alhaji Abdul Rasheed
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
18 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court)
Outcome
appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Matrimonial Property Division, Conveyancing Formalities, Company Property and Divorce, Presumption of Advancement
Source Language
English
Family Law Property Law Company Law Matrimonial Property Division Conveyancing Formalities Company Property and Divorce Presumption of Advancement

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 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nana Yaa Konadu

Petitioner/respondent/appellant

Alhaji Abdul Rasheed

Respondent/appellant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Exhibit 'E' was a valid and binding document capable of transferring property to the petitioner
  2. 2 Whether the properties acquired during the marriage should be shared equally
  3. 3 Whether the Kumasi, Adum House belonged exclusively to the petitioner or to the jointly owned company

Ratio Decidendi

Exhibit 'E' was not a valid conveyance as it was not witnessed or attested and could not transfer property, including company property, to the petitioner. All properties acquired during the marriage, regardless of whose name they are in, are to be shared equally between the parties. The Kumasi, Adum House belongs to the jointly owned company and not exclusively to the petitioner.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed

Orders

  • All properties acquired jointly during the marriage to be shared equally (50-50) between the parties
  • The Kumasi, Adum House is company property and not the exclusive property of the petitioner