December 12, 2018
SUPREME COURT
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Supreme Court of Ghana dismissed a consolidated appeal by grandchildren of Roberta Wuta-Ofei challenging the sale of Essie Lodge/Cedar House (Koala Shopping Centre) at Cantonments Road, Accra. The property had been the self-acquired asset of Robert Wuta-Ofei, a Ga from Osu, who died intestate in 1970; his widow administered the estate and four children inherited under Osu patrilineal customary law, with female children holding life interests. The 1st Respondent, the only surviving child and head of the Wuta-Ofei family, sold the property to the 2nd Respondent, a longstanding sitting tenant. Appellants argued estoppel based on Exhibit C (a tenancy agreement) and revenue sharing, and invoked PNDCL 111 and Article 17. The Court held Exhibit C did not alter the property’s customary nature, the sale was with Appellants’ knowledge and consent, and PNDCL 111 is not retrospective; the appeal failed and the Court of Appeal was affirmed.
J U D G M E N T
ADINYIRA (MRS), JSC:-
This appeal is in respect of the Plaintiffs/Appellants/Appellants [Appellants] in original suit no. AL 105/2007 which was consolidated with suit no P 96/2007 and in respect of the same property, Essie Lodge/Cedar House otherwise known as House No. F 889/2 Cantonments Road, Accra, or Koala Shopping Centre. The property was the self acquired property of one Robert Wuta- Ofei who died intestate in 1970. He was survived by his wife Barbara Wuta Ofei and four children, Roberta, Vida, Percy and the 1st Respondent. The Plaintiffs in both suits at the High Court are the grandchildren of Robert and Barbara Wuta Ofei claiming the property as beneficiaries of the estate of their mother Roberta Wuta- Ofei.
The reliefs sought in both cases are identical, that is, the setting aside of the sale of the said property by the 1st Respondent to the 2nd Respondent, who was the sitting tenant for decades, on the basis that they were not consulted before the sale as they also had an interest in same, and an order of perpetual injunction retraining the Respondents from dealing with the property.
The 1st Respondent claimed the right to sell the property as the head of family, administrator of the estate and the only surviving child of the parents.
The Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the High Court that upon the death intestate of Wuta–Ofei, a Ga from Osu, succession to his self acquired property became family property and by Osu customary law which is patrilineal it is his children who inherited him. The Court held further that all the four children of Wuta Ofei inherited the property, but the female children had only life interest in the estate. The Court further held that the 1st Respondent being the head of family is clothed with authority to deal with the property.
At the trial the Appellants elected not to lead evidence and they relied on the evidence of Robert Odamtten, the Plaintiff in suit no P96/2007 and we would therefore, where appropriate, refer to his evidence, in determining the appeal.
The grounds of appeal filed are:
1. That the judgment is against the weight of evidence.
2. That the Court of Appeal erred in holding that despite the interstate Succession Law (PNDCL 111) by the customary law of Gas (Osu), female children of a deceased original owner of property, who inherit the property cannot pass on their interest to their children (grand children of the deceased) thus the property reverts to the family o