MORGAN KWAME OPOKU v AKOSUA OSAA
January 18, 2023
CORAM
- PROF. KOTEY J.S.C., (PRESIDING) OWUSU J.S.C. AMADU J.S.C. PROF. MENSA-BONSU J.S.C. KULENDI J.S.C
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Equity and Trusts
- Civil Procedure
January 18, 2023
CORAM
Try asking the following...
OWUSU J.S.C. :-
On 21st March, 2019, the Court of Appeal, Accra, in a unanimous decision dismissed the Plaintiff/Appellant/Appellant (hereinafter referred to as Plaintiff’s) appeal against the Defendant/Respondent/Respondent (hereinafter referred to as Defendant) and affirmed the Judgment of the Trial Court as follows:
“Upon the facts and analysis of the evidence, the only reasonable conclusion is that the appellant’s grantor sat by, saw the respondent enter the land in 1984 and acquiesced in her spending money and labour to develop it without challenge. The appellant’s right of action first accrued to his grantor through whom he derives his title. Thus, his explanation that he had been away and did not know of the encroachment, and that he has registered his document cannot avail him. I will hold on the authority of VANDERPUYE vs. GOLIGHTLY & ORS. [1965] GLR 453 SC that the appellant’s grantor Dauda and thus the appellant was estopped through the grantor’s acquiescence from asserting his rights because after the respondent had acquired the land in good faith in 1984, Dauda stood by for over 15 years while the respondent incurred expenditure in developing the land. They are deemed to have waived their right….
It is for the above reasons that the appeal of the plaintiff/appellant fails in its entirety and is dismissed.
The Judgment of the trial Court is affirmed in favour of the defendant/respondent, but on grounds of laches and acquiescence on the part of the plaintiff/appellant’s grantor from whom the plaintiff/appellant derived his title”.
Dissatisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal, the plaintiff mounted this appeal before the Supreme Court on the following grounds; a. Both the Court of Appeal and the High Court were wrong in law when they dismissed the Plaintiff/Appellant/Appellant’s case.
b. The Judgment of both the Court of Appeal and the High Court were all against the weight of evidence.
c. Additional grounds of appeal shall be filed upon the receipt of the Certified True Copy of the Ruling.
It is noted for the record that, no additional ground was filed. The relief being sought from the Supreme Court:
To reverse/set aside the decision of the Court of Appeal, Accra and all the consequential orders dated the 21st Day of March, 2019. Before dealing with the arguments advanced in support and against the appeal, we will give a brief background of the case. The plaintiff instituted this action at the High Court, Accra for, 1. A decl
AI Generated Summary
In this Ghanaian land dispute, the Supreme Court, per Owusu J.S.C., dismissed an appeal by a purchaser who claimed title through assignment from Dauda Larbi Laryea over Parcel No. 709 at Odorkor. The plaintiff registered his title in 2009, but the 1st Defendant had acquired the land in 1984 from the Charbukwei family, built a two‑bedroom house and occupied it since 1986, and, after the Gbawe Kwatei Quartey family prevailed in ownership litigation, she repurchased the plot from them in 2004. The High Court dismissed the plaintiff’s claims, initially invoking Act 2 to protect the defendant. The Court of Appeal unanimously affirmed dismissal, rejecting Act 2 for lack of pleading and relying on laches and acquiescence. The Supreme Court struck a vague ground of appeal, found the weight of evidence to support the defendant’s long possession, emphasized the need to plead statutory defenses, and affirmed the Court of Appeal’s judgment.