AGYEI AND ANOTHER VRS. SAKYI (J4/15/2021) [2021] GHASC 200 (1 December 2021)

AGYEI AND ANOTHER VRS. SAKYI (J4/15/2021) [2021] GHASC 200 (1 December 2021)

The Appellant, as propounder of the will, failed to discharge the burden of proving due execution and validity of the will under the Wills Act. The evidence of the attesting witnesses was inconsistent and unreliable, and the forensic report indicated the signature was not authentic. The cumulative effect of the evidence led to the conclusion that the will was a forgery and fraudulently procured. The lower courts' findings were justified and are affirmed.

Citation
[2021] GHASC 200
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Lawrence Agyei; Plaintiff/respondent: Maame Adwoa Asiamah; Defendant/appellant: Bernard Opoku Sakyi (alias Nana Kwesi)
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
1 December 2021
Case Number
J4/15/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed; lower court judgments affirmed
Legal Topics
Validity of Wills, Burden of Proof, Forgery, Intestate Succession, Admissibility of Evidence
Source Language
English
Succession Law Probate Evidence Validity of Wills Burden of Proof Forgery Intestate Succession Admissibility of Evidence

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 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lawrence Agyei

Plaintiff/respondent

Maame Adwoa Asiamah

Plaintiff/respondent

Bernard Opoku Sakyi (alias Nana Kwesi)

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the purported Last Will and Testament of Fred Opoku Sakyi is valid under the Wills Act, 1971 (Act 360)
  2. 2 Whether the will was fraudulently procured and forged
  3. 3 Whether the burden of proof was discharged by the propounder of the will

Ratio Decidendi

The Appellant, as propounder of the will, failed to discharge the burden of proving due execution and validity of the will under the Wills Act. The evidence of the attesting witnesses was inconsistent and unreliable, and the forensic report indicated the signature was not authentic. The cumulative effect of the evidence led to the conclusion that the will was a forgery and fraudulently procured. The lower courts' findings were justified and are affirmed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; lower court judgments affirmed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The judgment of the Court of Appeal affirming the High Court is affirmed.