ELIZABETH DADZIE & 2 ORS vs THE HINDU MONASTERY OF AFRICA
November 10, 2022
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP ALEX OWUSU-OFORI (J)
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Probate and Succession
November 10, 2022
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In an application before His Lordship Alex Owusu‑Ofori (J), the Defendant/Applicant challenged the capacity of the wife and children of the late Bright Essel to institute proceedings regarding his intestate estate. The application asserted that only an administrator can bring matters relating to an intestate estate, and that the claimants’ writ failed to endorse the capacity in which they sued. The Respondents countered that beneficiaries need not obtain Letters of Administration, citing authorities, and also contended they had obtained Letters. The court examined Order 4 of CI 47 and emphasized procedural requirements on capacity endorsement. Applying PNDCL 111, the court held that although beneficiaries have interests, they must first obtain Letters of Administration to seek vesting of estate property. Finding the procedure adopted improper, the court dismissed the suit and awarded costs of GH¢2,000 to the Defendant.
The Defendant/Applicant brought the instant application challenging the Plaintiffs/Respondents herein from mounting this action.
That the gravamen of the application is to be found in paragraph 6 of the affidavit filed in support of the application.
It states “That matters relating to the estate of a deceased person who died intestate can only be brought to court by the administrator of a deceased’s estate this the Plaintiff lacks capacity to mount the instant action.”
Counsel submitted that one does not need Letters of Administration to issue a writ concerning the Estate of a deceased person. The only locus standing one needs to have is to be a beneficiary of that Estate.
Reference were made to the cases of:-
a) APPAU VRS OCANSEY (1993/94) 1 GLR 146 HOLDING 3
b) BOYA VRS MOHAMMED (SUBSTITUTED BY MOHAMMED AND MUJEEB (2017-2018) 1SCGLR 997, holding 3 and
c) SUSAN BANDOH VRS DR. (MRS) MAXWELL APPEAGYEI GYAMFI & ANOR CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/16/2016 dated 6th June 2019, Supreme Court Unreported pg. 5-6.
Counsel for the Plaintiff/Respondent further submitted that since the objection in the instant case is that even though the Respondents were wife and children of the deceased with an interest in his Estate under PNDCL 111 because they had not taken Letters of Administration they lack capacity to institute the instant action, is misconceived and should be dismissed in limine.
Counsel for the Defendant/Applicant in his response opposed the preliminary legal objection raised. That the rules of the court makes it clear under Order 4 how representative action should be brought to court.
Reference was made to the case of SHOPPING MALL ASSOCIATION V ROSEHILL GHANA LTD. & 2 ORS.
Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the Plaintiff need not obtain Letters of Administration to bring an action with respect to a deceased person in court, so long as they are beneficiaries to the Estate is enough. This is not the case in this matter. The Plaintiffs in this case are the Administrators of the deceased and they have obtained Letters of Administration already.
Reference was made to Order 4 of CI 47 that granted that they are beneficiaries of the Estate they still fail to endorse it on the face of the Writ.
That the Estate does not belong to them, it belongs to the deceased person and therefore their capacity should be endorsed on the face of the Writ but they failed to do so.
That, the said paragraph 1 of the Respondents’ statement of claim only indicated that they