MARY AFUA NELSON
1932
WEST AFRICAN COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Family Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
1932
WEST AFRICAN COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
AI Generated Summary
This case addresses an appeal from the Provincial Commissioner who dismissed an appeal originating from the Native Tribunal regarding the accountability of the defendant in family property matters according to Native Customary Law. The primary issue revolved around whether the defendant, assumed to be the head of the family, was liable to account to the junior family members, a principle established by precedent and customary law. The court ultimately dismissed the appeal and upheld the findings of the Native Tribunal and the Provincial Commissioner.
The following judgments were delivered :-
MICHELIN, J.
This is an appeal from the judgment of the Provincial Commissioner of the Eastern Province dated the 7th December, 1931, in which he dismissed with costs an appeal from the judgment of the Native Tribunal of the Ga Mantse dated the 30th July, 1931.
Before going into the merits of the appeal Mr. Akiwumi on behalf of the respondents raised the following preliminary objection :-
The Court below had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal from the Native Tribunal for the following reasons :-
(1) No record appears on the face of the proceedings that an application was made to the Native Tribunal and refused before the Court granted leave to appeal.
(2) Appeal should have gone to the District Commissioner and not to the Provincial Commissioner.
(3) The conditions of appeal had not been fulfilled in regard to the service of the notice of appeal upon the respondent.
The Court, however, after having heard counsel for the appellant, in reply, overruled each of these objections and directed that the appeal should proceed.
Five grounds of appeal were filed which appear at page 130 of the record. In arguing this appeal Mr. Awere dealt with grounds 2, 3, 5 and 6 together, then with ground 4. Ground 1 which practically embraces all the other grounds was not argued.
In dealing with grounds 2, 3, 5 and 6, he referred the Court ~o the decisions of the Full Court in Villars v. Baffoe, Renner's Reports 549 and Pappoe v. Kwak1f"F.C. 1923-25 158, and submitted that the defendant was head of the family and therefore not liahle to account to the plaintiffs who were junior members of the same family.
In arguing the fourth ground, he submitted that no accounts had been taken before the Native Tribunal delivered its judgment.
I shall in the first place consider the judgments in the two cases cited. In the case of Villars v. Baffoe an action had been brought in the Divisional Court by a woman who had obtained letters of administration against certain members of the deceased's family for the surrender and delivery up by them to her of certain articles of personal property which had belonged to the deceased. It was held by the Full Court that articles regarded as " family property" did not pass to the administratrix.
In the case of Pappoe v. Kwaku, where the defendant as head of the family took out letters of administration of a deceased member, it was held that he was not liabe to account to another member of the family.