KINGSFORD ARCHER v. ABLEKUMA NORTH MUNICIPAL ASSEMBLY
January 30, 2026
HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, GENERAL JURISDICTION 13
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE COMFORT KWASIWOR TASIAME, JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT
Areas of Law
- Evidence Law
January 30, 2026
HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, GENERAL JURISDICTION 13
GHANA
CORAM
Try asking the following...
Per Writ of Summons filed on the 14/12/2022, the Plaintiff prayed the Court for the following reliefs:
(1)A declaration that the Defendant’s inscription “Road: REMOVE NOW-BY ABNMA 18-10-22” written on the wall of the House No. 8, Cup Plant Street, South Odorkor, Accra on the 18th October, 2022 is offensive and unlawful;
(2)A declaration that the said inscription amounts to intimidation, harassment, embarrassment, inconvenience and pain;
(3)Damages for trespass, inconvenience and pain
(4)An order to remove the offensive inscription;
(5)Perpetual injunction restraining the Defendant, its servants, agents, assigns or whomsoever acting in its name from ever interfering with the said fence wall in
(6)Costs, including lawyer’s fees.any manner;
Defendant entered appearance and filed Statement of Defence. They denied all material facts and prayed the Court to dismiss the reliefs put before the court by the Plaintiff.
The following issues were set down for trial;
1.Whether or not the Plaintiff is the rightful owner of the landed property known as Parcel No. 418 (House No. 8, Cup Plant Street), South Odorkor, Accra.
2.Whether or not the said house with a fence, is covered by building permit officially issued by the then Accra-Tema City Council.
3.Whether or not the Defendant’s inscription “ROAD: REMOVE NOW-BY ABNMA 18-10-22” on the wall of the said house is offensive and unlawful, amounting to intimidation, harassment, embarrassment, inconvenience and unjust treatment of the Plaintiff.
Before proceeding to deal with the evaluation of the law and the evidence in this case viz-a viz the issues set down, let me make some preliminary remarks about what was required by the law in relation to the duty of the Plaintiffs. By law, the Plaintiffs have a burden to prove their case to the standard required in civil actions; that is, on a balance of probabilities.
Section 11 of the Evidence Act, 1975 (NRCD 323) states in part;
Section 11—Burden of Producing Evidence Defined.
Section 11(1) for the purposes of this Decree, the burden of producing evidence means the obligation of a party to introduce sufficient evidence to avoid a ruling against him on the issue.
***Section 11 (4) In other circumstances the burden of producing evidence requires a party to produce sufficient evidence so that on all the evidence a reasonable mind c
AI Generated Summary
The High Court (per Her Ladyship Justice Comfort Kwasiwor Tasiame) granted comprehensive reliefs to Kingsford Archer against a municipal authority whose agents marked his property with Road: REMOVE NOWBY ABNMA 18-10-22 in October 2022. Archer established ownership of House No. 8, Cup Plant Street, South Odorkor through a land certificate issued in 1992 and long possession since the 1970s, as well as an Accra-Tema City Council building permit (March 2, 1976) covering his fence wall. The court relied on evidentiary principles under the Evidence Act, the presumption arising from acts of ownership, and the indefeasibility of registered title. Central to the decision was a prior 20 July 1994 High Court judgment awarding Archer damages for unlawful demolition by the Accra Metropolitan Assembly; with no set-aside or appeal, that judgment remained binding. Concluding that the Defendants inscription was offensive and unlawful, the court ordered its removal, granted a perpetual injunction, and awarded GH250,000 damages and GH210,000 costs.