By: Alexander Afriyie
Akosua Serwaa Fosuh wants High Court judgment set aside, says burden of proof was wrongly placed on her over German marriage certificate
Three weeks after Ghana buried highlife icon Charles Kwadwo Fosu (Daddy Lumba) the fight over his estate has moved from radio debates to the Court of Appeal. At the heart of it is a question that touches thousands of Ghanaian families: When a marriage is contracted abroad, what counts as proof in a Ghanaian court?
On June 11, 2026, the Court of Appeal in Kumasi will decide whether to grant Akosua Serwaa Fosuh leave to amend her appeal against a November 28, 2025 High Court judgment. Her legal team argues the trial judge misapplied Ghana’s evidence law and shifted the burden of proof unfairly.
The case, Suit No. GJ12/20/2026, pits Ms. Fosuh against Abusua-Panin Kofi Owusu, Priscilla Ofori a.k.a. Odo Broni, and Transitions Funeral Home a.k.a. Enterprise Funeral Services.
The marriage existed. The court missed it”
In her Proposed Amended Notice of Appeal filed in May 2026, Ms. Fosuh does not just disagree with the High Court’s conclusion. She says the judge got the law wrong.
Her lead argument: The trial judge erred in law when she held that Ms. Fosuh “failed to prove the existence of a valid monogamous civil marriage contracted in Germany.”
Counsel Stephen Nsiah Opoku of Kulendi @ Law argues the judge confused two things: proving what German marriage law says, and proving that a marriage ceremony actually took place.
“The plaintiff led evidence of cohabitation, public representations by the deceased during his lifetime, eyewitness testimony, photographic evidence, issues of the union, documentary evidence, and correspondence from the German Embassy in Ghana,” the appeal states. Her team says that evidence “substantially corroborated the existence of the said ordinance marriage” and met the civil standard of “preponderance of probability.”
In plain terms: Even if the marriage certificate itself had issues, the appeal says other proof should have been enough for the court to accept that a marriage existed.
The Exhibit B problem: When a judge changes her mind
This is where the appeal gets technical — and potentially precedent-setting for Ghana’s courts.
Court records show that on November 17, 2025, the High Court admitted into evidence “Exhibits B, B1 and C” — documents described as the German marriage certificate and related papers. The defendants had objected to authenticity. The court overruled them and admitted the exhibits.
But in the final judgment on November 28, the same judge rejected those same exhibits.
Ms. Fosuh’s team calls that a legal error. “Rejecting the exhibits in the final judgment after admitting them amounted to an exercise of a review jurisdiction over its previous decision which jurisdiction the Court lacked,” the appeal argues.
They also say the judge “descended into the arena of litigation” by revisiting her own ruling suo motu, on her own motion when neither defendant had appealed that November 17 decision.
For lawyers watching the case, this raises a key question: Once a Ghanaian court admits a document, can it later throw it out without a formal appeal? The Court of Appeal’s answer could affect future civil cases.
Burden of proof: Who should prove what?
Another major ground is about “burden of proof” — who has the legal duty to prove a fact.
Ms. Fosuh’s team says that after the court admitted Exhibits B, B1 and C despite objections, the legal burden shifted. “Once the exhibits were admitted after objection, the Plaintiff/Appellant no longer bore any burden of proof of authenticity,” the appeal states. “The evidential burden had shifted to the Defendants/Respondents to disprove the marriage or establish forgery.”
Instead, they argue, the trial judge kept the burden on Ms. Fosuh and treated the lack of Ghana Embassy certification in Germany as “conclusively fatal,” ignoring other corroborative evidence.
The appeal cites Section 136 of the Evidence Act, 1975 N.R.C.D. 323, which allows authentication “by evidence or any sufficient showing capable of supporting a finding” that a document is what it claims to be. Section 161, her team says, is not the only way — it just creates a presumption if certification exists. Absence of certification, they argue, should not end the case.
A lawyer not involved in the matter told this reporter: “If the Court of Appeal agrees, it would remind lower courts that authentication has options. You don’t throw out a marriage just because one stamp is missing, if other evidence points to the same fact.”
No credible evidence” of customary marriage, appeal says
The appeal also challenges the High Court’s finding that Priscilla Ofori a.k.a. Odo Broni was “validly married under Akan custom in April 2010” to Daddy Lumba.
Ms. Fosuh’s team argues there was “no credible evidence on record to support it.” They point to what they describe as “photoshopped or edited pictures” and say the 1st Defendant’s evidence was “fundamentally hearsay.”
They add that unchallenged evidence showed Ms. Fosuh denied the customary marriage, yet the court concluded the 2nd Defendant was “held out as a legal wife” — an assertion they say was never proven.
Time, fairness, and the embassy stamp
A more human part of the appeal concerns process. Ms. Fosuh’s team says the trial judge directed that the German marriage certificate be authenticated by the Ghana Embassy in Germany, but did not give “reasonable time” for the embassy to act.
The appeal argues the judge should have waited for the certification or used her own expert witness, instead of “sacrificing procedural fairness for hasty record-time judgment.”
For Ghanaians in the diaspora, that point matters. Getting documents certified abroad takes weeks. If courts don’t allow that time, many overseas marriages could be hard to prove at home.
What happens next
On June 11, the Court of Appeal will only decide one thing: Should Ms. Fosuh be allowed to file the amended grounds? If yes, the substantive appeal will be heard later on those grounds.
If the Court of Appeal agrees with her arguments, it could set aside the entire High Court judgment and enter judgment in her favour. If not, the November 28 judgment stands.
What this means for ordinary Ghanaians
Beyond the personalities involved, this case touches a real issue: Ghanaians marry abroad all the time — in Germany, UK, US, Canada. But proving those marriages back home is often messy.
If the Court of Appeal clarifies how evidence law applies to foreign marriages, it could give clarity to widows, widowers, and families navigating estates, insurance, and benefits.
The bigger picture
Daddy Lumba’s music united Ghanaians across language, class, and politics. His estate case is now doing something similar — forcing a conversation about law, evidence, and fairness.
Ms. Fosuh says the marriage existed and the law was misapplied. The respondents will have their chance to respond. The Court of Appeal will decide.
Until then, the file at Kumasi remains open. And for many Ghanaian families with ties abroad, the outcome will be watched closely.