HAGAN AND OTHERS V. ADUM AND OTHERS (PC – CONSOLIDATED)

POLICY AND PRACTICE LAW REPORTS, 2PLR

Search

Search

–

(CONSOLIDATED APPEALS)

GEORGE HAGAN AND OTHERS

V.

EFFUAH ADUM AND OTHERS

AND

GEORGE HAGAN AND OTHERS

V.

ARABAH TANUAH

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL

7TH DAY OF JULY, 1939.

PRIVY COUNCIL APPEALS NOS. 82 & 137 OF 1936

2PLR/1939/25 (WACA)

–

OTHER CITATION(S)

2PLR/1939/25 (WACA)

(1939) V WACA PP. 35 – 41

LEX (1939) – V WACA 35-41

–

BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS:

LORD THANKERTON

LORD ALNESS

LORD FAIRFIELD

–

BETWEEN/PARTIES (Consolidated Appeals)

GEORGE HAGAN AND OTHERS — Appellants

AND

EFFUAH ADUM AND OTHERS — Respondents

AND

GEORGE HAGAN AND OTHERS — Appellants

AND

ARABAH TANUAH — Respondent

–

ORIGINATING COURT(S)

FROM THE WEST AFRICAN COURT OF APPEAL*

–

ISSUE(S) FROM THE CAUSE(S) OF ACTION

ESTATE ADMINISTRATION AND PLANNING – CUSTOMARY LAW SUCCESSION:- Application by “slave-wife” of deceased (and her children) and head of family of deceased  as persons interested in the estate of deceased person, both real and personal – How treated

–

CASE SUMMARY

These are two appeals, consolidated by order of the Board, against two judgments of the West African Court of Appeal, dated respectively the 19th and the 21st December, 1935, in two suits relating to the estate of the late Thomas Hagan, a native, who died at Winneba in the Central Province of the Gold Coast Colony on the 9th July, 1931.

The appellants are the brothers and sister of the deceased, and they were granted letters of administration of his personal estate by the Divisional Court of the said Province on the 22nd February, 1932. The respondents Effuah Adum and her children claim to be interested in the estate, both real and personal, as the domestic “slave-wife” and children of the deceased. The respondent Araba Tanuah claims to be interested in the estate as the head of the family of the deceased. It is common ground that the succession to the estate falls to be determined according to the native customary law.

–

DECISION(S) OF THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL

1.     There is no reason for a narrow construction of the words “suits and matters relating to the succession to the property”, as, distribution of the estate naturally comes within the meaning of these words, and valuation of the estate is necessarily incidental to ascertainment of the shares for the purpose of distribution.

2.     That Suit A is a suit relating to the succession to the property of the deceased within the meaning of head of (f) of section 43(2). If this be so, there can be no reason why letters of administration should not be obtained in one Court, and proceedings relating to the distribution of the estate should be dealt with by another Court.

3.     There can be no reason for rendering nugatory the jurisdiction conferred by head (f), and none of the Courts below have felt any practical difficulty in the matter. Accordingly the application for letters of administration in the Divisional Court can not preclude any party from instituting proceedings relative to distribution before the Native Tribunal.

–

DOWNLOAD PREMIUM PDF COPY (N2,000)

READ MORE

JUDGMENTS BY AREAS OF PRACTICE

JUDGMENTS BY PRACTICE/PROCEDURE ISSUES