Wife entitled to property settlement despite void marriage- SC tells Cameroonian-born, Canadian man
The apex court noted that having contributed to the acquisition of the properties, it is only fair and just that the respondent be given a share and consequently endorsed the decision of the High Court, which decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeal.
The Matrimonial Causes Act, 1971(Act 367) makes provision for property settlement when a marriage is declared a nullity or in case of a divorce. The Act, therefore, does not discriminate between a divorce and declaring a marriage a nullity.
Section 20 (1), it provides that:
"The Court may order either part to the marriage to pay to the other party a sum of money or convey to the other party movable and immovable property as settlement or property rights or in lieu thereof or as part of financial provision that the Court thinks just and equitable."
As such, the Supreme Court, in the opinion of Owusu(JSC) endorsed the decision of both the High Court and the Court of Appeal thus holding that the properties listed in the judgment of the High Court, with the exclusion of the Nissan X-Terra, should be shared equally between the parties.
The court further ordered the appellant to transfer and or convey the interest of half of the Aplaku properties to the respondent(wife) per Section 21 of Act 367.
Fact
The appellant, a businessman, Pascal Muako is a Camerounian-born citizen. He deals in the importation and sale of used clothes which he imports from Canada to Ghana, Cameroun, and Guinea for sale whilst the respondent, Lydia Kwaw is a Ghanaian trader in used cloths.
The parties met in the course of their trading activities. Subsequently, the appellant married the respondent customarily at Nkoranza, in the then Brong Ahafo Region sometime in 2003 in the presence of the respondent's family.
Their marriage was converted into an ordinance one as evidenced by the Marriage Certificate dated 30th August 2003. They also stayed together and cohabited in their matrimonial home at Aplaku anytime the appellant visited Ghana from 2003 to 2011.
The wife filed for a decree of nullity on the ground that the marriage is by law void and that, the respondent be granted a share in all the assets in Ghana acquired by the parties and or acquired after the formation of PASCO M & SONS LTD. and costs.
The man however in his cross-petition, denied that he is legally married to the respondent. He also denied that the respondent made a financial contribution towards the acquisition of any of the properties as the latter was a destitute living in abject poverty when they met.
One striking thing that came up at the trial was the insistence of the man to the effect that his marriage to the respondent was a sham and that ít was just to facilitate for the latter to get a visa to travel to Canada.
The trial High Court in its judgment made a finding of fact that the respondent believed in all intent and purposes that she was legally married to the appellant and decreed the marriage a nullity because, at the time of marrying the Ghanaian woman, he was already legally married to one Suzanne Nkwekwe in Canada.
Being dissatisfied with the outcome, especially on the settlement of the property, the man went to the Court of Appeal but the appellate court affirmed the decision.
Subsequently, Mr Pascal went to the apex court insisting among others that the judgment was against the weight of the evidence.
After analyzing the finding of fact by the two lower courts, the apex court noted that having contributed to the acquisition of the properties, it is only fair and just that the respondent be given a share and consequently endorsed the decision of the High Court, which decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeal.
Click here to read the full judgment.