2012
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Court of Appeal decision concerns land at Dzorwulu claimed by an individual who traced title to a 1960 grant by Osu Mantse Nii Noi Dowuona IV, evidenced by a 1962 indenture and a 1994 Land Title Registry entry. The Lands Commission asserted that Executive Instrument No. 108 of 1964 vested all Accra-Tema and North Dzorwulu stool lands in the President, and allocated a portion to the 3rd defendant in 2004. The appellant argued E.I. 108 could not capture her private land, and that the vesting lapsed under the 1992 Constitution. The Court dismissed the omnibus against the weight of evidence ground because the case was decided on legal arguments without evidence. Relying on the Supreme Courts Omaboe III ruling and articles 257 and 258, it held E.I. 108 remains effective, Lands Commission properly manages such lands, and even individual lands can become public through compulsory acquisition. The appeal was dismissed and costs awarded to the 3rd defendant.
J U D G M E N T
MARIAMA OWUSU, J.A.:
On 2nd February, 2009, the High Court, Land Division, Accra, in its ruling held among other things as follows:
“In the premise, the court holds as follows:
a. That by E.I. 108, the said Executive Instrument vested all Stool lands in the Accra-Tema areas and in the North Dzorwulu as prescribed or delineated in the Survey Plan, aforesaid with the President in Trust for the Stool.
b. And that, by E.I. 108 the compulsory acquisition per E.I. 108 of 1964 did into lapse with the coming into force of the 1992 Constitution.
I am strengthened or emboldened in this position by the Supreme Court case of Omaboe III & Ors. Vs. Attorney General, 2. Lands Commission (2005-2006) SCGLR 594.
The law, it is stated, is as an unruly steed. I have tried in vain to invite her to the river banks of equity and good conscience to drink deep in order to mitigate her rigor but she has declined the invitation because Parliament and the Constitution have bestowed upon her an immutable will, replete with self-sufficiency and self-righteousness.
With the greatest reluctance therefore, I am compelled to dismiss the plaintiff’s action and is accordingly dismissed. The court will assess cost at GH¢500.00 in favour of the defendants against the plaintiff.
Dissatisfied with the decision of the court, the plaintiff appealed to this court.
The Grounds of Appeal are as follows:
a. The judgment is against the weight of evidence.
b. The honourable high Court Judge erred in holding that stool land by interpretation includes private and personal land of the plaintiff/appellant.
c. Other grounds will be filed on receipt of the ruling or record of proceedings.
The relief sought from the Court of Appeal:
The ruling of the High Court and costs be set aside and the ruling reversed in favour of the plaintiff/appellant.
Before dealing with the argument canvassed in support and against this appeal, I will like to give a brief background of this case.
The plaintiff at the court below issued a writ against the defendants jointly and severally for the following reliefs;
a. A declaration of title to all that piece and parcel of land lying and situate at Dzorwulu bounded on the North West by Adom Road measuring 166.7 feet more or less on the North East by Botchway Street measuring 193.1 feet more or less on the South East by Barnor Street measuring 88.8 feet more or less on the South West by the property of Margaret Mary Adjei measuring 85.2 feet more or les