ROSEMOND NORTEYE -VRS- FRANK NORTEYE [2020] GHACA 11 (18 June 2020)

ROSEMOND NORTEYE -VRS- FRANK NORTEYE [2020] GHACA 11 (18 June 2020)

The Court of Appeal found that the presumption of resulting trust in favour of the Appellant was rebutted by sufficient oral and circumstantial evidence showing the Respondent provided the funds for the acquisition of House No. 18, and that the Appellant acted as a fiduciary. The trial judge did not err in taking judicial notice of the employability of illegal immigrants, nor in refusing forensic examination of certain exhibits. The writ of summons was valid under the current procedural rules as the statement of claim was properly signed by a qualified lawyer. All grounds of appeal failed, and the High Court judgment was affirmed.

Citation
ROSEMOND NORTEYE -VRS- FRANK NORTEYE [2020] GHACA 11 (18 June 2020)
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Rosemond Norteye; Defendant/appellant: Frank Norteye
Court
ghaca
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
18 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court, Land Division, Accra
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment affirmed.
Legal Topics
Resulting Trust, Constructive Trust, Title to Land, Judicial Notice, Burden of Proof, Forensic Evidence, Procedural Validity of Writs
Source Language
eng
Property Law Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Resulting Trust Constructive Trust Title to Land Judicial Notice Burden of Proof +2 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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rosemond Norteye

Plaintiff/respondent

Frank Norteye

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court, Land Division, Accra

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in declaring the Plaintiff/Respondent the lawful owner of House No. 18 Fair Havens, East Legon Hills, Accra.
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in taking judicial notice of the employability of illegal immigrants in the UK.
  3. 3 Whether the writ of summons was a nullity for being signed in the name of a law firm.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found that the presumption of resulting trust in favour of the Appellant was rebutted by sufficient oral and circumstantial evidence showing the Respondent provided the funds for the acquisition of House No. 18, and that the Appellant acted as a fiduciary. The trial judge did not err in taking judicial notice of the employability of illegal immigrants, nor in refusing forensic examination of certain exhibits. The writ of summons was valid under the current procedural rules as the statement of claim was properly signed by a qualified lawyer. All grounds of appeal failed, and the High Court judgment was affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment affirmed.

Orders

  • Plaintiff/Respondent declared true and lawful owner of House No. 18 Fair Havens, East Legon Hills, Accra.
  • Defendant/Appellant and his agents perpetually restrained from interfering with Plaintiff's enjoyment of the property.