ANNOBIL v. OBOSU

Ishmael Annobil and another appealed to the Supreme Court from a High Court judgment by Osei‑Hwere J. dismissing a suit seeking a declaration of title to land known as Twaakukrom in the Ajumako Traditional Area, together with possession and injunction. The trial judge found the plaintiff’s traditional evidence insufficient and credited numerous boundary owners who testified that the respondent, Nana Kweku Obosu, and his predecessors exercised acts of ownership over the disputed land. On appeal, Mr. B. J. da Rocha contended the matter was essentially chieftaincy—arguing ownership follows the Twaakukrom stool—and challenged the rejection of two documentary exhibits under the Evidence Decree. Taylor J.S.C., adopting the High Court’s reasoning, held that in Fanti areas stool control does not imply proprietary ownership, the challenged exhibits were unreliable or inadmissible, and the plaintiff failed to discharge the burden of proof. The Court also noted doubts about the appellant’s locus standi but dismissed the appeal on the merits, with Lamptey J.A. and Essiem J.A. concurring.