Els: MBN360
An Accra Circuit Court has ordered a businessman to pay GHC200,000 in damages after ending an 11-year relationship built on a promise of marriage, raising important questions about property rights and emotional loss in failed engagements.
The judgment was delivered in favour of Ernestina Torgbor, who had filed a counterclaim for breach of promise to marry against Vince Kontoh.
Presiding over the case, Justice Sedinam Awo Kwadam, a High Court Judge sitting with additional responsibility as a Circuit Court Judge, awarded Ernestina GHC50,000 as general damages and GHC150,000 as compensation for the breach. Vince was also ordered to pay interest at prevailing commercial bank rates from 16 February, 2026, alongside GHC20,000 in court costs.
The Court declared that Ernestina has a beneficial interest in a two-bedroom apartment at East Legon and directed that she should continue using a Toyota RAV4 and an industrial blender, which Vince had not claimed. Both parties were also instructed to take steps to formalise Ernestina’s interest in a six-unit, two-bedroom apartment block at East Legon.
The case arose after Vince filed a writ of summons seeking to evict Ernestina following the termination of their relationship. Ernestina resisted the claim, arguing that Vince had repeatedly promised marriage.
Read also:
- CDD raises red flag over GH₵20,000 gift threshold in ministers’ code
- GSA, Indian Investors Forge New Industrial Cooperation Path
- National Executive Council (NEC) of CLOGSAG threatens nationwide strike on March 9
- Majority, Minority clash over bill to revert NIB name to BNI and overhaul national security structure
- “I like players who give me problems”- Black Stars Head Coach Otto Addo
Evidence showed that the couple’s relationship began in 2013, while Vince lived abroad and Ernestina resided in Ghana. During their time together, Vince provided funds for industrial machinery, a vehicle, his partner’s children’s education, and the construction of a six-unit apartment block in East Legon.
Ernestina supervised the construction, managed the funds, and relocated from Dansoman to East Legon in 2017 at Vince’s request.
The Court heard that Vince had presented Ernestina with a ring, publicly acknowledged himself as her “in-law” during her father’s funeral, wrote a tribute, made donations, and participated fully in the funeral rites. Despite cohabiting for years, Vince ended the relationship, allegedly stating he preferred an unemployed woman who could care for him.
Vince admitted giving her the ring but claimed it was merely to “ward off male attention” and did not constitute a binding promise to marry. Ernestina argued the ring represented a firm commitment, and she had relied on his assurances for 11 years, rejecting other suitors and providing financial, emotional, and domestic support.
The Court ruled that the evidence showed a clear and binding promise to marry, with Vince’s explanation unconvincing. It held that Ernestina’s contributions gave her a beneficial interest in the property, which equity must protect, and dismissed Vince’s ejectment claim.
Justice Kwadam noted the case highlighted the legal and social implications of long-term relationships built on promises of marriage, stressing that breaches can have serious emotional and economic consequences.
