CHRISTIANA QUARTSON v. PIOUS POPE QUARTSON
2012
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- ATUGUBA, J.S.C. (PRESIDING)
- ANSAH, J.S.C.
- OWUSU (MS.), J.S.C.
- ANIN-YEBOAH, J.S.C.
- GBADEGBE, J.S.C
Areas of Law
- Family Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
2012
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case involves a divorce petition where the Petitioner sought significant reliefs including a sizeable financial settlement and transfer of properties. The trial judge granted the divorce but provided a smaller financial award. Upon appeal, the Court of Appeal only modestly increased the financial settlement leading to the present appeal. The Supreme Court acknowledged the Petitioner’s non-financial contributions to the marital home, increasing the financial settlement while not granting her equal ownership in the property. The case underscores the evolving recognition of non-financial contributions within matrimonial property disputes.
J U D G M E N T
ANSAH, J.S.C.
The Petitioner and the Respondent lived together as husband and wife for 25 years. The petitioner petitioned for divorce, citing unreasonable behaviour and adultery and sought the following reliefs:
i. That the said marriage be dissolved.
ii. That the petitioner be granted custody of Perry, the minor child of the marriage
iii. That the respondent be ordered to vacate the matrimonial home
iv. That the Petitioner be paid a lump sum of ¢500, 000, 000 (Five Hundred Million cedis) as dissolution settlement
v. That the Petitioner be given all her director’s fees and allowances as a director of Pious Trading and Construction Company Limited of which the Respondent has coveted as “his” company.
vi. That the Petition’s [SIC] 40 percentum shares in Pious Trading And Construction Company Limited be quantified and paid to her as part of the marriage settlement.
vii. That the Respondent be condemned in costs
viii. That the Petitioner may have such further reliefs as this Honourable Court may deem fit having regard to property rights.
The respondent cross petitioned and sought the following reliefs:
(a) That the marriage be dissolved
(b) That the Respondent be given custody of all the children of the marriage
(c) That an order be directed to petitioner to vacate from matrimonial house when put up solely from the sweat of Respondent.
The trial judge dissolved the marriage, but dismissed the Petitioner’s prayer that the Respondent be ordered to vacate the matrimonial home. The court awarded a lump sum of GH¢35,000 (Thirty-five ThousandGhana Cedis) instead of the Petitioner’s prayer of GH¢50,000. In addition the court awarded the appellant one double plot of land either at the North of Kwesimintsim or Anaji and a Nissan Pathfinder with registration number WR 4141 T. The petitioner was further ordered to vacate the matrimonial home within 30 days.
The petitioner appealed against the trial court’s decision. In the Court of Appeal, the petitioner’s grounds of appeal were thus,
a) The trial judge erred in ordering the petitioner to vacate the matrimonial home within 30 days;
b) The trial judge erred in not vesting the matrimonial home in the petitioner;
c) The trial judge erred in not ordering the respondent to vacate the matrimonial home;
d) The amount of GH¢35,000 awarded to the petitioner as financial settlement was woefully inadequate considering the circumstances of the marriage and the evidence on record;
e) The trial