CLERK v. CLERK

JUDGMENT OF CAMPBELL J.

The plaintiff in this case seeks relief by way of an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the occupation of house No.F.539/1, Osu, Christiansborg. Her claim for relief is based on two grounds, namely, that she contributed financially and assisted physically in the construction of the house thereby acquiring beneficial interest therein and secondly even if this is not so, she is entitled to remain in residence as it is the matrimonial home of the parties.

The parties were married under the Marriage Ordinance, Cap.127 (1951 Rev.), in 1929, and the marriage is still subsisting. In 1964 the defendant brought a petition for divorce against the plaintiff on the grounds of cruelty and or desertion, his petition was however dismissed on the merits on 23 December 1964 (reported in [1964] G.L.R.712). On 29 December 1964, the defendant addressed a letter to the plaintiff which was tendered in evidence as exhibit A pointing out to her that on completion of the building in question, [p.355] the outstanding debt of £G1,550 was with a struggle on his part repaid, further that rates for the following year and other expenses totalling £G200 would have to be paid, also that the building would have to be so managed that he could reimburse his expenditure thereon and also the legal expenses of his unsuccessful petition for divorce. In consequence, he informed plaintiff that he had decided, in accordance with Accra Municipal Council plan approved on 14 December 1964, to have the house extended and improved for purpose of leasing and that therefore the sheds and oven in the backyard should be removed and all rooms in the house vacated. He further in the same letter informed her that spare accommodation had been provided for her at Anna Lodge his ancestral home where he was living and further that he intended implementing his plans in January 1965. As a result of this letter the plaintiff issued a writ on 5 January 1965 claiming the relief mentioned, and in answer to her claim the defendant counterclaimed for a declaration of title and an order for recovery of possession against the plaintiff.

The plaintiff claims relief on the ground that she is beneficially entitled to the property by virtue of her financial contribution thereto and the physical assistance rendered during the construction of the same.

Her evidence which is substantially denied by the defendant is that she made contributions from her baker