Berimah Vrs Nanor & 2 Ors [2021] GHASC 165 (24 March 2021)

Berimah Vrs Nanor & 2 Ors [2021] GHASC 165 (24 March 2021)

The Supreme Court found that the Plaintiff's claim was based on forged documents and fraudulent conduct, and that he could not benefit from his own wrongdoing. The evidence did not support a resulting trust in his favour, and the presumption of advancement was not rebutted. The 2nd Defendant's long possession and the Plaintiff's conduct estopped him from denying her ownership. The Court of Appeal erred in granting relief to the Plaintiff and in failing to properly consider the evidence and applicable equitable principles.

Citation
[2021] GHASC 165
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent/respondent: Richmond Boamah Berimah; 1st Defendant: Albert Nanor; 2nd Defendant/appellant/appellant: Janet Opoku; 3rd Defendant/appellant/appellant: Pastor Dan Cato
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
24 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; judgment of the Court of Appeal set aside except for grounds (d) and (f) of the counterclaim.
Legal Topics
Resulting Trust, Presumption of Advancement, Estoppel by Conduct, Forgery, Matrimonial Property, Appeals Procedure
Source Language
English
Property Law Equity and Trusts Family Law Resulting Trust Presumption of Advancement Estoppel by Conduct Forgery Matrimonial Property +1 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richmond Boamah Berimah

Plaintiff/respondent/respondent

Albert Nanor

1st Defendant

Janet Opoku

2nd Defendant/appellant/appellant

Pastor Dan Cato

3rd Defendant/appellant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding a resulting trust in favour of the Plaintiff despite evidence of forgery and fraud
  2. 2 Whether the presumption of advancement was properly rebutted
  3. 3 Whether estoppel by conduct applies to bar the Plaintiff's claim

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court found that the Plaintiff's claim was based on forged documents and fraudulent conduct, and that he could not benefit from his own wrongdoing. The evidence did not support a resulting trust in his favour, and the presumption of advancement was not rebutted. The 2nd Defendant's long possession and the Plaintiff's conduct estopped him from denying her ownership. The Court of Appeal erred in granting relief to the Plaintiff and in failing to properly consider the evidence and applicable equitable principles.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; judgment of the Court of Appeal set aside except for grounds (d) and (f) of the counterclaim.

Orders

  • Judgment of the Court of Appeal set aside except for grounds (d) and (f) of the counterclaim.
  • 2nd Defendant's appeal allowed except for claims for general damages and interest.