GREGORY AGANA AMOAH v. STEPHANY ABOKZELE
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- ADJEI, JA – PRESIDING
- LOVELACE-JOHNSON, JA
- ACKAH-YENSU, JA
Areas of Law
- Evidence Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Family Law
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The High Court originally ruled in favor of the Plaintiff, prompting the Defendant to appeal, arguing insufficient evidence and legal errors concerning property rights of spouses. The appellate court upheld the High Court's decision, addressing legal principles around evidence evaluation, the necessity of corroboration, and property rights of spouses. Decisions from notable cases like Mensah v. Mensah were discussed, emphasizing that property acquired during marriage is not automatically joint property unless substantial contribution is proved.
ADJEI, J.A:
On 31st July, 2012, the High Court Bolgatanga gave judgment in favour of the Plaintiff/Respondent herein against the Defendant/Appellant for all the reliefs endorsed on the Plaintiff’s writ of summons. The Court dismissed the Defendant/Appellant’s counterclaim for failing to prove it. The relief (b) endorsed on the writ of summons was the same as relief (a) on the Defendant’s counterclaim. The Defendant/Appellant dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial High Court filed a Notice of Appeal against same to this Court on 28th September, 2012. There was only one ground of appeal on the notice of appeal and that was the omnibus clause,that the judgment is against the weight of evidence on record. The Defendant/Appellant applied for leave to amend his notice of Appeal and same was granted on 24th July, 2013. On 5th August 2013 the Defendant/Appellant filed his amended Notice of Appeal. One more ground of appeal was added to the omnibus ground. The grounds of appeal as contained in the amended notice of appeal are as follows:
“a. That the judgment is against the weight of the evidence.
b. That the learned trial Judge erred in law when he held that the substantial contribution principle is still the law governing property rights of spouses.
PARTICULARS OF ERROR OF LAW
Article 22 (3) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Gladys Mensah v Stephen Mensah SC Civil Appeal No. JA/20/2011 dated 22/2/2012“.
In this appeal the Plaintiff/Respondent would be referred to as the Plaintiff and the Defendant/Appellant as the Appellant.
We now proceed to discuss grounds (a) of the appeal. The law is now trite that on appellant who appeals on the omnibus ground of appeal that is the judgment is against the weight of evidence on record is inviting the appellate Court to review the entire record, correct all the errors in the judgment and finally come to the conclusion that the trial judge did not properly evaluate the evidence on record. An appellate court when called upon to correct the errors in a judgment based on the omnibus ground of appeal is required to evaluate all the entire evidence on record and correct the findings of fact which were not properly made, and, furthermore evaluate material evidence which the trial court failed to take into consideration and come to the right conclusion.
In the case of Agyenim-Boateng v Ofori & Yeboah [2010] SCGLR 861 the Supreme Court set down the four grounds upon which an appella