SUSAN LAWOE v. SETH RASHID ASUO
2022
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- OFOE, J.A. (PRESIDING)
- JANAPARE BARTELS KODWO, J.A.
- BERNASKO ESSAH, J.A.
Areas of Law
- Family Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Equity and Trusts
2022
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Court of Appeal, per S. R. Bernasko Essah, J.A., resolved an appeal and cross-appeal arising from a 25 July 2017 High Court judgment between spouses who married in 1999. The husband, Seth Rashid Asuo, a senior agricultural officer, and his seamstress-farmer spouse contested divorce ancillaries, including custody and significant marital assets: a three-bedroom house near the Regional Administration in Ho, a two-bedroom house at Alayi, a pick-up (VR 177-14), and land in Kpetoe. The trial court granted divorce, awarded custody to Asuo, and distributed property, settling the value of the Regional Administration house on the spouse and the Alayi house on Asuo. On appeal, the Court rejected suspicion as a basis for finding the Regional Administration house encumbered, reaffirmed that marital assets acquired during marriage are jointly owned and should be shared equally, and ordered valuation and equal division of both houses and the pick-up. The husband’s bid to exclude the spouse from the pick-up’s value failed, and the spouse’s attempt to obtain the house itself rather than its value was refused.
S. R. BERNASKO ESSAH (MRS.), J.A.
This is an Appeal filed by the Respondent/Appellant, (hereinafter referred to as the Respondent) and a Cross-Appeal filed by the Petitioner/Respondent (hereinafter referred to as the Petitioner) against the Judgment of the High Court delivered on the 25th of July 2017.
The ground of appeal of the Respondent as set out in the Notice of Appeal is the omnibus one which is that
1. The judgment is against the weight of evidence on Record.
The Respondent indicated that further grounds will be filed upon receipt of the record of proceedings, but that was not to be.
The grounds of Petitioner’s Cross-Appeal are as follows:
1. That the trial judge erred in-law when he granted custody of the issues of the marriage to the Respondent/Appellant instead of the Petitioner.
2. The learned judge erred in law when he settled the financial value of the house situate at Regional Administration area, Ho in favour of the Petitioner/Respondent instead of the house itself.
The background facts necessary to understand this opinion are as follows: The Petitioner a seamstress and farmer, per an amended Petition dated 19th of November 2014, sought the following reliefs against the Respondent, a senior officer with the Municipal Directorate of Agriculture in the Ho Municipal Assembly:
a. The marriage celebrated on the 9th of January 1999 be dissolved.
b. Petitioner be granted custody of the three children of the marriage.
c. Respondent be ordered to make to the Petitioner such maintenance pending suit and thereafter such periodic payments as the Court shall deem fit
d. The Respondent ordered in the alternative to pay to the Petitioner a lump sum of GH50,000
e. The following properties be settled in favour of the Petitioner
i. A 3 bedroom house locate at Regional Administration, Ho.
ii. 50% of all rental income from the residential properties rented.
iii. 50% share of all the mushroom farms.
iv. 50% share of the profit of Enyophel mushroom enterprise since its establishment.
v. Nissan pick-up (unknown registration number).
vi. 50% share of a 40-acre farmland at Agortime Kpetoe.
In his Amended Cross petition, dated 23rd February 2015, the Respondent admitted that the marriage had broken down beyond reconciliation as a result of the Petitioners desertion of the matrimonial home and infidelity and cross-petitioned in the alternative as follows:
i. The marriage celebrated between the parties on 9th January 1999 be dissolved.
ii. An