In a landmark ruling that clarifies the legal weight of engagement rings and long-term cohabitation in Ghana, the Accra Circuit Court has ordered a businessman,
Mr. Vince Kontoh, to pay GHS 200,000 in damages and compensation to his former partner, Ms. Ernestina Torgbor.
The judgment, delivered on Monday, February 16, 2026, by Justice Sedinam Awo Kwadam, concludes a three-year legal battle that began when Vince tried to eject Ernestina from a property she had helped him develop during their 11-year relationship.
Case Summary: 2013–2026
The relationship began in 2013 while Vince was living abroad. For over a decade, the couple operated with a level of financial and emotional interdependence that the court ruled was consistent with a "binding promise to marry."
The Evidence of "Intent to Marry"
Vince argued that he never made a formal promise, claiming the ring he gave Ernestina was merely a "ward-off" ring to deter other male suitors. However, Justice Kwadam found this unconvincing, citing the following:
-
The Ring: Held as a symbol of commitment that Ernestina relied upon to reject other suitors.
-
Public Acknowledgment: Vince publicly identified as Ernestina’s "in-law" at her father's funeral and participated in traditional rites.
-
Financial Interdependence: Ernestina managed funds remitted by Vince and supervised the construction of a six-unit apartment block in East Legon.
-
Cohabitation: The couple lived as a family from 2017 until the relationship's collapse.
The Court’s Award and Orders
The court dismissed Vince’s attempt to evict Ernestina as a "licensee" and instead recognized her beneficial interest in the property due to her non-financial contributions and years of labor.
| Head of Award | Amount / Order |
| Compensation for Breach | GHS 150,000 |
| General Damages | GHS 50,000 |
| Legal Costs | GHS 20,000 |
| Interest | To be paid at prevailing commercial bank rates. |
| Property Interest | Beneficial interest in the East Legon two-bedroom apartment. |
| Assets | Right to retain a Toyota RAV4 and an industrial blender. |
Legal Precedent and Social Impact
Justice Kwadam noted that the ruling addresses a significant social reality: individuals (often women) who invest years of emotional and physical labor into relationships based on informal promises of marriage.
Under Ghanaian law (specifically the precedent set in Afrifa v. Class-Peter), a breach of promise to marry is actionable if it can be shown that the promise was serious and that the promisee suffered loss—whether emotional, social, or economic.
Key Takeaway for Modern Relationships
The court emphasized that while marriage is voluntary, the law will step in to protect the "equitable interests" of a partner who has sacrificed career opportunities or property rights in reliance on a promise that is later broken without just cause.
The Bottom Line
Vince Kontoh’s attempt to legally classify an 11-year partner as a "mere licensee" failed because the court looked at the substance of their life together rather than just the absence of a marriage certificate. For Ernestina Torgbor, the GHS 200,000 serves as a recognition of over a decade of "emotional and economic investment."
