CHRISTIANA QUARTSON v. PIOUS POPE QUARTSON

MARFUL-SAU JA:

This appeal is taken from the judgment of the High Court Sekondi dated the 14th November 2008.The petitioner at the court below who is the appellant in this appeal by her amended petition prayed for the following;

i. 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 ¢500,000,000.00 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 Ltd of which the respondent has coveted as his company.

vi. That the petitioner’s 40% shares in Pious Trading and Construction Company Ltd 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 relief as this Honourable court may deem fit having regard to property rights.

The respondent at the court below who remains the respondent herein in his cross petition claimed the following:-

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 the petitioner to vacate from the matrimonial house which was put up solely from the sweat of the respondent.

In its judgment the trial court after dissolving the marriage dismissed appellant’s claim that respondent be ordered to vacate the matrimonial home The court however awarded a lump sum of GHc 35,000 to appellant instead of the prayer of GH¢50,000. Apart from the above the court further awarded the appellant the following:

(a) One double plot either at the North of Kwesimintsim or Anaji.

(b) A Nissan Pathfinder with registration number WR 4141T

The appellant was then ordered to vacate the matrimonial home within 30 days. The respondent was awarded all the reliefs in his cross petition, namely the dissolution of the marriage; custody of the children of the marriage who were virtually adults except one and the order directing the appellant to vacate the matrimonial house.

Dissatisfied with the judgment of the High Court the appellant has appealed to this court praying that the order of the court below be set aside and judgment entered for her on the ancillary reliefs.

The Notice of Appeal had six grounds of appeal which were:

a) The trial judge erred in ordering the petitioner to vacate