2022
SUPREME COURT
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Supreme Court of Ghana, per Ms. Justice M. Owusu, dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal from the Court of Appeal, Cape Coast, which had affirmed the High Court, Sekondi’s summary dismissal of his suit. The Plaintiff, asserting Eguafo Nsona Family allodial title over approximately 1,667 acres at Lower Inchaban, sued the 1st and 2nd Defendants for orders to plot and register the land and expunge unauthorized transactions. Nana Akosua Mfransie II was joined as 3rd Defendant, denying the family’s title and asserting the Lower Inchaban Stool’s allodial title, relying on a 2011 Circuit Court, Takoradi judgment (Suit No. 141/98: Nana Tuful Asamoah v Kweku Smith). The Plaintiff pleaded fraud regarding a 2015 statutory declaration and argued for a plenary trial. The Supreme Court agreed with the Court of Appeal that the fraud allegation did not impact the preliminary res judicata issue because it postdated and was unrelated to the 2011 judgment. Applying res judicata principles, including Henderson v Henderson and the elements of estoppel, the Court found the parties the same or privies and the earlier judgment final on the merits. The appeal was dismissed.
OWUSU (MS.) JSC:-
On 21st October, 2020, the Court of Appeal, Cape Coast, in the Central Region dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal against the 3rd Defendant. The Court held among other things as follows:
“For all of the above reasons, we hold that the resolution of this issue of res judicata has substantially disposed of this suit as envisaged under Order 33 rule 5 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, CI 47 and endorsed by Gbadegbe JSC in the case of Ofei Kwaku Mante v Mike Similao & 2 Others Civil Appeal No. j4/10/2016 dated 11th May 2017. By so holding, we also endorse the conclusions of the learned trial judge at page 230 of the record that the determination of the issue of res judicata effectively eroded the substratum of the Plaintiff’s entire suit thereby rendering a pursuit of the other reliefs endorsed on the writ of summons wholly otiose.
In our view, the learned trial judge applied the law correctly to the facts on record before her and we therefore find no occasion to impeach her conclusions reached in the case.
We therefore affirm the decision of the trial court and dismiss the appeal in its entirety as lacking merit.”
Dissatisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal, the Plaintiff filed an appeal to the Supreme Court on the following grounds: a) That the judgment is against the weight of affidavit evidence adduced at the High Court.
b) That the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred when it held that the action of the plaintiff/Appellant/Appellant was caught by Estoppel by Res Judicata.
c) Additional grounds will be filed pursuant to leave granted upon receipt of the Record of Appeal.
THE RELIEFS SOUGHT FROM THE SUPREME COURT
That the decision of the Court of Appeal, Cape Coast, affirming the decision of the High Court, Sekondi, be set aside and the suit remitted back to the High Court, Sekondi to be tried.
Before going into the arguments advanced in support and against this appeal, we would like to give a brief background of the case.
The designation of the parties in this appeal would be maintained as they bore in the trial court. Accordingly, the Plaintiff/Appellant/Appellant would be referred to simply as Plaintiff and 3rd Defendant/Respondent/Respondent as 3rd Defendant.
It is also noted for the record that, the Plaintiff did not file additional ground/s of appeal as indicated in his notice of appeal.
The plaintiff herein issued a writ of summons against the 1st and 2nd Defendants at the High Court, for an ord