CAROLINE OTOO VRS NORA ODOFOLEY OTOO (J4/17/2019) [2024] GHASC 17 (24 April 2024)

CAROLINE OTOO VRS NORA ODOFOLEY OTOO (J4/17/2019) [2024] GHASC 17 (24 April 2024)

The Supreme Court found that the Kotobabi property was validly settled on Susana Korkoi Otoo by agreement in open court during divorce proceedings, as evidenced by the record and subsequent conduct, including the omission of the property from Joseph Kabufio Otoo's will. The absence of a formal court order was a correctable oversight. Prior judgments did not finally determine the substantive property rights and were procedural, so estoppel per rem judicatam did not apply. The residuary clause in the will could not include the Kotobabi property, as it was no longer part of the testator's estate at death.

Citation
CAROLINE OTOO VRS NORA ODOFOLEY OTOO (J4/17/2019) [2024] GHASC 17 (24 April 2024)
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/appellant: Caroline Otoo; Defendant/respondent/respondent: Nora Odofoley Otoo (substituted by Mercy Desah Lokko)
Court
ghasc
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
24 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; lower court judgments set aside; judgment for plaintiffs on all reliefs.
Legal Topics
Settlement of Property in Divorce, Estoppel Per Rem Judicatam, Interpretation of Wills, Consent Orders, Appeals Process
Source Language
eng
Property Law Family Law Wills and Estates Settlement of Property in Divorce Estoppel Per Rem Judicatam Interpretation of Wills Consent Orders Appeals Process

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 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Caroline Otoo

Plaintiff/appellant/appellant

Nora Odofoley Otoo (substituted by Mercy Desah Lokko)

Defendant/respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Kotobabi property was validly settled on Susana Korkoi Otoo by agreement in divorce proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs are estopped from relitigating the matter by prior judgments
  3. 3 Whether the residuary clause in Joseph Kabufio Otoo's will included the Kotobabi property

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court found that the Kotobabi property was validly settled on Susana Korkoi Otoo by agreement in open court during divorce proceedings, as evidenced by the record and subsequent conduct, including the omission of the property from Joseph Kabufio Otoo's will. The absence of a formal court order was a correctable oversight. Prior judgments did not finally determine the substantive property rights and were procedural, so estoppel per rem judicatam did not apply. The residuary clause in the will could not include the Kotobabi property, as it was no longer part of the testator's estate at death.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; lower court judgments set aside; judgment for plaintiffs on all reliefs.

Orders

  • Declaration of title to the Kotobabi property (H/No C505/13) in favour of Susana Korkoi Otoo's estate
  • Declaration that the building was settled on Susana Korkoi Otoo by agreement in divorce proceedings and forms part of her estate