GRACE OSAEBEA FIANKO & others v. MATHEW AKOTUA ADDO & others
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- JUSTICE EUDORA CHRISTINA DADSON(MRS
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case involves a protracted legal battle over the ownership of a property in Accra, initially claimed by the Plaintiffs as administrators of their deceased father's estate. The case reached the Supreme Court, which confirmed the beneficial ownership of the property by the Defendants. When the Plaintiffs renewed their claims citing fraud, they failed to meet the required standard of proof to overturn the previous judgments. The plea of estoppel was successfully argued by the Defendants, preventing re-litigation of the issues already settled by the courts. Ultimately, the court dismissed both the Plaintiffs' claims and the Defendants' counterclaims.
[1] Introduction and background
Indeed fraud vitiates everything. It is apposite to quote Edward Wiredu JSC (as he then was) in Okofoh Estates Ltd v Modern Signs Ltd [1996-97] SCGLR 233 at 253 as follows: “An allegation of fraud goes to the root of every transaction. A judgment obtained by fraud passes no right under it and so does a forged document or a document obtained by fraud passes no right”. Lord Denning LJ in the case of Lazarus Estates Ltd v Beasley [1956] 1 QB 702 at page 712 delivered himself thus:
“No court in this land will allow a person to keep an advantage which he has obtained by fraud. No judgment of a court, no order of a Minister, can be allowed to stand if it has been obtained by fraud. Fraud unravels everything. The court is careful not to find fraud unless it is distinctly pleaded and proved; but once it is proved, it vitiates judgments, contracts and all transactions whatsoever”.
In the case of Dzotepe vs Hahormene III (1987-88) 2 GLR 681 at 701 the Supreme Court delivered itself thus,
“The judicial edifice was not construed to lend ear to every cry of fraud from suitors who have lost on merits.”
[1.1] What is the genesis of this case
The deceased 1st Plaintiff who has been substituted by the present 1st Plaintiff and his brother Nathaniel Bosomprah Fianko applied for a Writ of Summons to issue at the District Court for the following particulars of claim:
“The Plaintiffs as Administrators of the Estate of Nathaniel Fianko Akotuah (deceased) and the Landlords of House No. B565/6 Abossey-Okai, Accra claim against the Defendants ejected (sic) jointly and severally an order of ejectment from House No. B565/6 and order for payment of rent arrears from January, 1992”.
The father of the Defendant, the late Daniel Tawiah Akotuah Addo herein applied and was joined to the suit as Co-Defendant and filed his Statement of Defence. The District Court, Grade 1, 28th February Road delivered its judgment on 25th January 1995 in respect of Suit No. 299/92 that “the position is that the father of the Plaintiff was a mere trustee of the Co-Defendant who has the beneficial interest… The legal effect of the LA or the position of the plaintiff is that at best they have stepped into the position of their father as the legal title holders with the Co-Defendant still holding on to his beneficial title or interest”.
The Plaintiffs filed an appeal against the decision of the District Court to the High Court and on 30th October 2001 the High Co