2024
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed the 2nd Defendant's appeal, holding that the Defendant failed to properly file a Notice of Appeal in compliance with Rule 8 of CI 19, thus invalidating the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal to entertain the appeal. The Plaintiffs succeeded in proving their case on the preponderance of probabilities and were entitled to judgment. The preliminary legal objections raised by the Plaintiffs were correctly considered by the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court found no reason to disturb the decisions of the lower courts.
GAEWU JSC:
My Lords, on 24th January 2024, this court dismissed the appeal of the 2nd
Defendant/appellant/appellant (hereinafter referred to as “the 2nd
Defendant”) against the judgment of the Court of Appeal that had
affirmed the judgment of the High Court dated 27th April 2018 in favour of
the Plaintiffs/Respondents/ Respondents (hereinafter referred to as “the
Plaintiffs”).
We reserved the reasons that informed our decision and I now proceed to
set out the full reasons.
On 11th April 2012, the Plaintiffs took out a Writ of Summons from the High
Court against the 1st Defendant/respondent (hereinafter referred to as “the
1st Defendant”) and prayed for the following reliefs:
“1. Damages for trespass
2. An order of perpetual injunction to restrain the Defendant, his
agents, privies and assigns from entering onto or in any way
disturbing the Plaintiffs and their caretakers’ possession of the
land.
3. An order cancelling Land Certificate No. GA36749, Vol. 59,
Folio 375, issued to the Defendant.
4. Cost including legal costs”
The writ was accompanied by a statement of claim and the two processes
were served on the 1st Defendant.
By an order of the trial High Court dated 6th June 2013, the 2nd Defendant, a
grantee of the 1st Defendant was joined to the suit. By another order of
joinder made on 15th July 2014, the 3rd Defendant was also joined to the
suit. These joinders necessitated the amendment of the writ of summons
and statement of claim by the plaintiffs to include the 2nd and 3rd
Defendants to the suit.
The Defendants filed separate statements of defence and the 1st
Defendant added a counterclaim for a declaration that he is the owner of
“ALL THAT PIECE OR PARCEL OF LAND situate lying and being at Oyarifa-
East (Accra) and bounded on the North by Lessor(s) land measuring 201.2,
173.3, 141.5, 192.4, 103.1 and 337.6 feet more or less on the East by
Lessor(s) land measuring 415.9 and 311.8 feet more or less, on the South
by the Lessor(s) land measuring 867.1 feet more or less, on the West by
Lessor(s) land measuring 693.1 feet more or less and containing an
approximate area of 7.83 acres or 3.13 hectares more or less.
The 3rd Defendant also had a counterclaim as follows:
“1. A declaration of title to “ALL THAT PIECE OR PARCEL OF LAND
situate lying and being at Oyarifa-East (Accra) and bounded
on the North by Lessor(s) land measuring 201.2, 173.3, 141.5,
192.4, 103.1 and 337.6 feet more or less on the East by
Lesso