IN RE ARTHUR (DECEASED) ABAKAH AND ANOR. v. ATTAH-HAGAN AND ANOTHER

The Supreme Court addressed an appeal arising from the High Court, Cape Coast, where Griffiths‑Randolph J. had set aside a consent order recorded by Owusu J. in probate proceedings concerning the will of Robert Benjamin Arthur of Cape Coast. The executors were Arthur’s son, Robert Samuel Arthur, and his brother, Ekow Abakah, who were also attesting witnesses and small beneficiaries. The deceased’s maternal siblings—John Kwame Attah‑Hagan, Efua Akon, and Efua Attah—lodged a caveat challenging the genuineness of the testator’s signature and objecting to beneficiaries as attesting witnesses. Before Owusu J., counsel for both sides agreed to expunge the attesting witnesses’ beneficial interests and to grant probate, but the High Court later revoked this order. The Supreme Court (Azu Crabbe J.S.C., with Lassey J.A.; Archer J.A. concurring) held that counsel’s consent binds the parties under Order 60, r. 21(1), that consent orders may be set aside only on limited grounds, corrected the procedural omission to remove the caveat, and confirmed the grant of probate. Archer added observations on executors’ eligibility, discretion under r.21(2), and expunging wills.