KWEKU KWEINU SEY & ANOTHER v. MADAM HARRIET SERWAA ANIN

This appeal arose from a dispute over the validity of the will of Theophilus Ernest Annin dated 21st January 1998. The plaintiffs, who were the executors of the will, sought to have it declared valid, while the defendant, the deceased's sister (later substituted by her daughter), challenged its validity on grounds of forgery. The trial court found that the two attesting witnesses, Samuel Amartey and Samuel Quartey, gave inconsistent evidence regarding the venue where the will was executed - one said it was at the deceased's house in Cantonments while the other said it was at his office in Osu. Based on this inconsistency, the trial court held that the witnesses could not have been present at the same time as required by Section 2(3) of the Wills Act 1971, and declared the will invalid. The Court of Appeal reversed this decision, holding that the trial judge erred in rejecting both witnesses' evidence without proper evaluation. The appellate court found that both witnesses were truthful but one had a faulty recollection of the venue. The court emphasized that where there is a proper attestation clause, there is a presumption of due execution, and one credible witness can sustain the validity of a will. The court also reversed the trial court's finding that House No. 17, Mankralo Street, Cantonments formed part of the deceased's estate, holding that the defendant failed to lead sufficient evidence to establish ownership in the deceased, while Stella Owusua Anin, being in possession, had a statutory presumption of ownership in her favour.