Legal practitioner Samuel Kissiedu has described the recent High Court judgment involving Highlife icon Daddy Lumba and Akosua Serwaa as a firmly grounded decision driven largely by technical considerations.
Speaking in an interview with Nana Romeo on Okay FM, Kissiedu said the case raised several interconnected legal questions that required the court to closely examine inheritance, marriage classifications, and how laws from different jurisdictions apply to Ghanaians married abroad.
According to him, “Lumba’s case has raised a number of technical issues. Looking at the inheritance, the succession, the types of marriages and conflict of laws… It’s actually an interesting judgment.”
He argued that the ruling is difficult to fault because it was based on technical deficiencies rather than the substantive claims of either party.“I’ve gone through everything and so far, it has been a solid judgment. When you check it well, you will see that it was the technicalities that beat the plaintiff, Akosua Serwaa. I’m not sure why that happened,” he said.
Kissiedu pointed out that the speed of the trial may have prevented the plaintiff’s legal team from rectifying key documentation concerns highlighted early in the proceedings.
He noted: “Maybe it’s the speedy trial they did that affected them and they couldn’t put the house in order… From the day the court listened to the injunction and they refused the injunction, it came out that there were issues with some of the documents regarding the marriage certificate.”
He added that the judge expected those concerns to be addressed but they were not:
“They were supposed to authenticate the documents… If they had applied and requested the original and gotten true copies, they were supposed to do all that before the trial began.”
Kissiedu emphasized that the judgment also provided valuable clarification on the different forms of marriage recognized under Ghanaian law and how they affect succession rights.
He concluded that the outcome, while decisive, offers important lessons:
“Whoever won has won and we’ve learnt a lot from this case. The judge also elaborated on the types of marriages.”
