AKUA MARFOA v. MARGARET AKOSUA AGYEIWAA

JUDGMENT

BAFFOE-BONNIE JSC:

This is an appeal by the Appellant/ Respondent/ Appellant (hereinafter, Appellant) against the decision of the Court of Appeal, allowing the appeal from the judgment of the High Court in Accra, dated the 25th day of February, 2006. The judgment against which this appeal is brought was delivered on 31st March 2006.

The facts are fairly simple and generally uncontroverted.

The Appellant and the Respondent were both married to the late George Asare Ntim who died testate on 15th July, 1995. The will of the deceased was read in 1995. Under the will, the testator gave the respondent and her six children, jointly, a house at Mateheko in Accra known as Number B262/15 West Abossey Okai; two thirds of his farm at Odwaa near Akokoaso and a portion of his house also at Odwaa. The testator also gave three rooms in his house at Odwaa and a third of his farm at Odwaa to his three children which he had with the appellant. The testator did not make any provision for the appellant under his will.

The executors that were named in the will renounced their right to executorship. On 10th June, 2002, Letters of Administration with Will annexed, was granted by the High Court to the respondent. The appellant took an action by originating summons to the High Court on 6th July, 2002 for reasonable provision out of the estate of the testator. The High Court granted the application and made the following orders:

One plot of the Testator’s land known as House Number B262/15, West Abossey Okai, Accra.

One room in the house of the testator at Odwaa near Akokoaso for life.

The testator’s farmland at Odwaa near Akokoaso should be divided into equal parts and one portion to go to appliacant (Akua Marfoa ) and her children Nancy Abena Pokua, Rosina Yaa Gyanmea and Andrews Kwabena Nti.

The respondent appealed against the ruling of the High Court. The Court of Appeal set aside the ruling of the High Court and in place of it, substituted an order refusing the application. The reasons for reversing the decision of the High Court by the Court of Appeal, which were essentially procedural lapses are captured in the statement by Gbadegbe JA(as he then was)as follows;

“In this regard, the requirement of placing all the facts before the court that might indicate the Appellant’s needs in terms of bare necessities and other requirements of a decent standard of living become relevant in order to assist the court to consider the extent and mode of its interference as