Evidence against a deceased person in Ghana case law.

In the circumstances, where further corroborative evidence was required in the light of the denial by Abeebange’s brother,(PW1) and the court was not provided with any good reason for failing to calling such,(it was stated by the Tindana that the representatives of the various Timdonmolgo clans were present) then the burden of proof had not been discharged and it was not proper for the court of appeal to set aside the findings of the trial court which had the opportunity to see the witnesses and evaluate their evidence and substitute it with its own that “We hold the view that by providing the items for the purification, Abeebange represented to the Tindana that he had accepted that the land belongs to the family of the first defendant and that constitutes conclusive evidence of admission by Abeebange within the meaning of section 26 of the Evidence Act 1975….” without strong and cogent reasons.

ADONGO ALOGTE VRS PETER AKOLGO AKUNLIBE & ANO CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/69/2024 [2026] SLR (SC) 20 · Supreme Court · 2026 · LOVELACE-JOHNSON JSC

A judge in receipt of uncorroborated evidence consisting in the main of charges against a deceased person does not swallow the story lock, stock and barrel, but first views it from a suspicious standpoint.

ADRIANUS A. K. V. VEGGEL vs. CLARA NAADU NARTEY ,TDC DEVELOPMENT COMPANY CIVIL APPEAL J4/69/2023 [2025] SLR (SC) 3 · Supreme Court · 2025 · ASIEDU JSC

It is true that a claim of a gift from a deceased person must always be approached with caution if not suspicion. In this respect the customary law is no different from the common law. For as was said by Brett M.R. in In re Garnett; Gandy v. Macaulay (1885) 31 Ch.D. 1 at p. 9, C.A.: “The law is that when an attempt is made to charge a dead person in a matter, in which if he were alive he might have answered the charge, the evidence ought to be looked at with great care; the evidence ought to be thoroughly sifted, and the mind of any Judge who hears it out to be, first of all, in a state of suspicion; but if in the end the truthfulness of the witnesses is made perfectly clear and apparent, and the tribunal which has to act on their evidence believes them, the suggested doctrine [of corroboration] becomes absurd.”

IN RE OHENE (DECD.); ADIYIA v. KYERE [1975] 2 GLR 89 [1975] SLR (CA) 20 · Court of Appeal · 1975 · FRANCOIS JA