KOJO ATTA PANYIN FORSON & JOJO ATTA KAKRA FORSON & ABA TAWEAH FORSON VS COLUMBUS BRUCE & JOHN FRANCIS APPIAH
2015
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- BARBARA TETTEH-CHARWAY (J)
Areas of Law
- Probate and Succession
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Contract Law
2015
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In consolidated suits involving the estate of George Ekow Forson, the plaintiff, Rosemary Phorson, argued that she was a joint owner of the 'Anyaa House,' despite the deceased's will leaving it to his sister and niece. The plaintiff claimed financial contributions to the house's construction during her marriage to the deceased, supported by evidence such as pay slips and correspondence. The court found the plaintiff’s evidence credible and ruled in her favor, declaring her a joint owner and nullifying the property devise in the will. Various legal principles were affirmed, including the presumption that properties acquired during marriage are considered marital property and must be divided equitably upon dissolution, ensuring equal rights within the marriage.
The above-mentioned suits were consolidated but tried separately.
In suit noBMISC 12/2013, the plaintiff, Rosemary Phorson, sued the defendants, ColumbusBruce and John Francis Appiah, executors of the will of her deceased ex-husband, George Ekow Forson, (hereafter referred to as the deceased) for a declarationthat she was joint owner of the house at Anyaa, (hereafter referred to as the “AnyaaHouse”). The deceased had devised the said house to his sister, Rita Forson andher daughter, Nancy Asamoah in his will.
She also prayed for recovery ofpossession of her share in the said house.
In the second action, Mercy Phorson, acting as next friend of Kojo Atta PanyinForson, Jojo Atta Kakra Forson and Aba Taweah Forson, applied for an order forreasonable provision to be made out of the estate of the deceased under section13(1) of the Wills Act 1971, Act 360, for the upkeep of his children with the plaintiff.
As noted earlier, in suit no BMISC 12/2013, the plaintiff’s case was that she was ajoint owner of the “Anyaa House”. She conceded that the land on which the housewas built was acquired solely from her husband’s personal resources before theygot married.
However, she claimed that she contributed approximately £6000pounds towards its construction.
Specifically, she stated that she and thedeceased took a loan of £5, 500 pounds and used £3000 out of the amount to buya van to be run commercially.
A portion of the proceeds of the said van was appliedtowards the construction of the house and the outstanding loan amount wasexpended on the project.
She further stated that, at all material times, she wasemployed as an accountant and was in a position to have contributed and didcontribute towards the construction of the “Anyaa House”. She tendered herpayslip as evidence of her earnings.
She further testified that, when her deceasedex-husband’s uncle failed to render proper accounts for monies remitted to him tobe used for the “Anyaa House”, her father was entrusted with the role ofsupervising the work and reporting on developments to the deceased.
Shetendered correspondence between her father and the deceased regarding theAnyaa property as evidence.
According to the plaintiff, there was little that the deceased did during thesubsistence of their marriage, without her financial input.
She testified aboutproperties that they jointly acquired in the United Kingdom (hereafter referred to asUK) and of pooling their resources together for fertility treatment.
She s