Collins Amponsah Boateng -vrs- Retired Majot Yaw Agyenim Boateng & 3 Others [2022] GHACA 60 (28 July 2022)

Collins Amponsah Boateng -vrs- Retired Majot Yaw Agyenim Boateng & 3 Others [2022] GHACA 60 (28 July 2022)

The Plaintiff/Appellant failed to prove he was the customary successor and Head of Family of the late B. K. Gyimah or a member of the immediate family. The evidence did not establish his capacity, and inconsistencies in his case further undermined his claim. The deceased, as the sole surviving member of his immediate family, had the capacity to devise the properties in his will. The trial judge did not err in dismissing the suit for lack of capacity. However, the costs awarded were excessive and punitive and were reduced on appeal.

Citation
[2022] GHACA 60
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Collins Amponsah Boateng; Defendant/respondent: Retired Major Yaw Agyenim Boateng; Defendant/respondent: K. Appiah Boateng; Defendant/respondent: Edward Appiah; Defendant/respondent: B. E. Adu Manu
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
28 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed except for variation of costs
Legal Topics
Testamentary Capacity, Family Property, Customary Succession, Costs
Source Language
English
Succession Law Customary Law Testamentary Capacity Family Property Customary Succession Costs

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Collins Amponsah Boateng

Plaintiff/appellant

Retired Major Yaw Agyenim Boateng

Defendant/respondent

K. Appiah Boateng

Defendant/respondent

Edward Appiah

Defendant/respondent

B. E. Adu Manu

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff/Appellant had capacity as customary successor and Head of Family to sue regarding the estate of the late B. K. Gyimah
  2. 2 Whether the properties in dispute were family property or self-acquired property of the deceased
  3. 3 Whether the deceased had testamentary capacity to devise the properties in his will

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff/Appellant failed to prove he was the customary successor and Head of Family of the late B. K. Gyimah or a member of the immediate family. The evidence did not establish his capacity, and inconsistencies in his case further undermined his claim. The deceased, as the sole surviving member of his immediate family, had the capacity to devise the properties in his will. The trial judge did not err in dismissing the suit for lack of capacity. However, the costs awarded were excessive and punitive and were reduced on appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed except for variation of costs

Orders

  • Judgment and orders of the trial court affirmed except as to costs
  • Costs varied to GH¢20,000 total (GH¢5,000 per defendant)