FRANCIS YANKEY v. KOFI YANKEY _ OR.

This appeal arose from a decision of the Circuit Court, Takoradi, dated 27 November 2001, in a family dispute over House No. 93/1 at Kojokrom near Sekondi. The first plaintiff sought recovery of possession, rent arrears from January 1998, and an injunction against a sibling, the defendant, who had taken over the property and collected rents. The plaintiffs’ case was that their stepfather, the late Chief of Kojokrom, Nana Panyin Ye Na II, gifted the plot to the second plaintiff for meritorious service and asked the first plaintiff to build her a house; PW1, the linguist to the chief, corroborated the grant and ‘Aseda’ rites. The defendant claimed he purchased the plot in 1950, built the house from his own resources, allowed the first plaintiff to occupy as a licensee, and exercised ownership, including collecting rent. He counterclaimed for title and an injunction. On appeal, counsel challenged the second plaintiff’s joinder and the first plaintiff’s capacity, relying on Order 16 rule (8) and cases on capacity. The Court of Appeal held Order 16 rule (8) inapplicable, affirmed that misjoinder/nonjoinder does not defeat proceedings under Order 15 rule 6, endorsed principles from Gurtner v Circuit and Amon v Raphael Tuck on joinder, found the capacity objection untimely, and agreed that municipal records did not prove ownership or longstanding possession. The appeal was dismissed with costs; Ansah JA concurred, noting the proceedings were saved despite omitted implementary steps, and Addo JA agreed.