ERNESTINA OPOKUAH v. ADWOA NYAMEKYE & ANOTHER
2021
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- BAFFOE-BONNIE, JSC (PRESIDING)
- PWAMANG, JSC
- AMADU, JSC
- HONYENUGA, JSC
- PROF. MENSA-BONSU (MRS.), JSC
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
2021
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Supreme Court of Ghana, per Baffoe-Bonnie JSC, summarily dismissed a further appeal in a land title dispute over a parcel at New Achimota along the Nsawam–Accra Road. Both sides traced title to the Onamrokor Adain Family of Accra. The plaintiff, assigned the land in 2004 by Kingsley Adu Baffour, attempted to evict mechanics and later to register title; she was notified of a prior interest recorded for Emmanuel K. Tweneboah, the 1st defendant’s grantor, who had a Land Certificate (GA 16344) under the Land Title Registration Act, 1986 (PNDCL 152). A composite plan prepared by the Lands Commission showed the disputed area lies within Tweneboah’s parcel number 159. The trial court found the plaintiff’s search site plan did not match the actual site and that the 1st defendant’s documents covered the land. Applying the doctrine of concurrent findings and statutory priority under the Land Registry Act, 1962 (Act 122), and invoking nemo dat, the Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts. The plaintiff’s acts of possession and attempted impeachment of the Land Certificate failed.
BAFFOE-BONNIE, JSC:-
My lords, I wish it to be placed on record that this is one of the cases where their Lordships were of the view that the appeal should be dismissed summarily, essentially, because their Lordships were of the view that the trial High Court Judge had identified the correct issues and had done a proper analysis and evaluation of the evidence adduced and had come to the correct conclusions. The Court of Appeal had also properly concurred in the findings of fact made and confirmed the conclusions. Further, this case did not raise any new principles of law of public interest. So this brief ruling should be read alongside the Judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal
This is an appeal against concurrent findings by the High Court in its judgment dated 3rd May, 2017 and the Court of Appeal whose judgment was delivered on 25th October, 2018, both in favour of the 1st defendant/respondent/respondent (the 1st defendant) and against the plaintiff/appellant/appellant (the plaintiff). The authorities are settled that we ought to be slow in reversing such findings unless a compelling case is made by the appellant. The cases include Achoro v Akanfela [1996-97] SCGLR 209; Asibey v Gbomittah & Commander Osei [2012] 2 SCGLR 800 and Acquie v. Tijani [2012] SCGLR 1252; and Koglex Ltd v Field (No.2) [2000] SCGLR 175. In the case of Gregory v Tandoh [2010] SCGLR 971, the Supreme Court, speaking through Dotse, JSC stated the grounds on which the court would depart from concurrent findings in the following passage at pages 986-987 of Report;
“…….a second appellate court, like this Supreme Court can and is entitled to depart from findings of fact made by the trial court and concurred in by the first appellate court under the following circumstances: First, here from the record the findings of fact by the trial court are clearly not supported by evidence on record and the reasons in support of the findings are unsatisfactory; Second, where the findings of fact by the trial court can be seen from the record to be either perverse or inconsistent with the totality of evidence led by the witnesses and the surrounding circumstances of the entire evidence on record; third, where the findings of fact made by the trial court are consistently inconsistent with important documentary evidence on record; fourth, where the first appellate court had wrongly applied the principle of law in Achoro vrs Akanfela (already referred to supra) and other cases on the prin