DORIS DAPAAH VS CEDRIC KOFI OWUSU
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE BARBARA TETTEH-CHARWAY (MRS)
Areas of Law
- Family Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Civil Procedure
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Ghana High Court judgment, by Her Ladyship Justice Barbara Tetteh-Charway, resolves a dispute between former spouses over House No. 215/30 at Abeka Lapaz, Accra, acquired about twenty-five years earlier through joint contributions. The Plaintiff opposed a sale and sought renovation, while the Defendant favored sale and equal sharing after accounting for outlays. With competing valuations—Architectural and Engineering Services Ltd valuing at GH202,067 and the Defendant claiming GH240,000—the court appointed an independent valuer whose unchallenged report was accepted. The Defendants defence and counterclaim were struck out under Order 32(A) of C.I. 87; after counsel withdrew, the Defendant ignored hearing notices. Citing Julius Sylvester Bortey Alabi v Paresh & 2 Ors, the court proceeded to order sale at a forced sale value of GH434,978, equal division of proceeds, a first purchase option for the Plaintiff, and GH5,000 costs.
The Plaintiff and the Defendant are currently divorced and live abroad.
Some twenty-five(25) years ago, they both contributed monies towards the purchase of the property in dispute, known as House No. 215/30, Abeka Lapaz, Accra.
The Plaintiff brings this action on the background that information reaching her indicates that the Defendant intends to sell off the property when there is no agreement between them to that effect.
Whereas the Plaintiff insists on renovating the property, the Defendant desires that it should be sold so that the proceeds can be shared between the parties after the various amounts that each has spent on the property has been deducted from the proceeds of sale.
The Plaintiff, in the alternative, prays that she is given the first option to buy the property in the event that the Court grants the Defendant’s request for its sale.
Plaintiff has caused a valuation of the property to be done by the Architectural and Engineering Services Ltd and the open market value of the property stands at Two Hundred and Two Thousand and Sixty-Seven Ghana Cedis (GH¢202, 067. 00). The Defendant, on the other hand, also claims to have caused a valuation of the property in question to be done in January 2016 with a resultant price of Two Hundred and Forty Thousand Ghana Cedis(GH¢240, 000. 00). To ensure an equitable distribution of this marital asset, the Court appointed a valuer to assess a fair market value of the property in dispute.
The Court appointed valuer’s report was not challenged by any of the parties and therefore will be accepted as a fair assessment of the market value of the property in dispute.
It is significant to note that before the case was set down for trial, the Defendant’s defence and counterclaim was struck out pursuant to Order 32(A) of C. I. 87 for failure to file a witness statement.
The Defendant, whose lawyer withdrew his representation in the course of proceedings, was served with hearing notices but failed to participate in the ensuing trial.
In the case of Julius Sylvester Bortey Alabi vs Paresh, & 2 Ors ( 2018) 120 G. M. J page 1, the Supreme Court per Dotse JSC expressed the view that; “ if a party voluntarily and deliberately fails and or refuses to attend upon a Court of competent jurisdiction, (such as the High Court which determined this case) to prosecute a claim against him, he cannot complain that he was not given a fair hearing or that there was a breach of natural justice. ”Having regard to the totality o