MABEL OSEI v. STEPHEN KWABENA BOATENG
2015
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- S.E.KANYOKE J.A. (PRESIDING)
- E.K.AYEBI J.A.
- GERTRUDE TORKORNOO, J.A
Areas of Law
- Family Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
2015
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In this matrimonial case, the appellant sought several remedies including the dissolution of marriage, custody of children, and division of jointly acquired properties. The trial court ruled partially in her favor, dissolving the marriage and awarding her some financial compensation but rejecting her claims on all properties. The appellant contested this ruling, particularly the trial judge's acceptance of the Weija property's sale price. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial court's decision, supporting the application of equitable sharing principles and the acceptance of the property's sale price as the best available evidence. The appeal was subsequently dismissed with references to several past legal statutes and cases.
J U D G M E N T
AYEBI, J.A:
1. This is a matrimonial case in which the Appellant as petitioner at the trial Court prayed for:
“a. the dissolution of the marriage entered into on 17th June,1987 under Act 367
b. an order granting custody of the two issues of the marriage namely Kenneth Boateng aged 13 years and Cyrus Boateng aged 7 years
c. an order on the respondent to account for the proceeds derived from the sale of the 10 plots of land at Mandela Dome-Accra and the 5 bedroom uncompleted house at Kumasi.
d. an order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondent from disposing of the matrimonial home, House No.111, Mandela 2, Dome-Accra
e. an order that all the properties acquired by the petitioner and the respondent during the marriage from 1990 to date be shared equally among them.
f. an order that the respondent pays GH¢10,000.00 lump sum to the petitioner by way of alimony
g. an order for the maintenance of the two issues of the marriage by respondent.”
2. The respondent in his answer, cross-petitioned and prayed that:
(i) The prayer of the petitioner be rejected
(ii) The marriage celebrated between the petitioner and the respondent be declared null and void.
(iii) The petitioner be ordered to pay the cost of the suit
(iv) The custody of the two children of the marriage be granted to the respondent.
3. The evidence on record showed that the parties live in Germany where they met. They became lovers and eventually married under the Matrimonial Causes Act in 1997 in Ghana. According to the appellant between 1990 and 2006, she worked in factories. The respondent also arranged for her to be engaged in dancing in hotels where she earned on the average 8,000DM a month. Out of her earnings, she was giving the respondent good money between 15,000 DM and 20,000 DM with which they bought cars, fridges and other electronic appliances for sale in Ghana. She said they carried on the sales in a rented store at Kaneshie. They converted the store into a Communication Centre and then again into a restaurant called “Salt and Pepper”. She asserted that she invested heavily in the restaurant before and after it was guttered by fire.
4. Continuing, the appellant stated that out of the business they jointly operate with the money she provided, they acquired 10 plots of land at Mandela in Accra, began the construction of a five-bedroom house at TUC Residential Area, Kumasi and put up House No.111, Mandela No.2, Dome which became their matrimonial hom