2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
SSNIT appealed a High Court judgment that had upheld a lease of Plot No. 3, 7th Avenue, North Ridge, to the 2nd Defendant, an individual who was Ghana’s ambassador to Denmark, and who obtained Land Certificate GA 27097. SSNIT relied on an Asset Swap Agreement and a 2001 MoU with the Government to claim beneficial ownership of “Site A” at 6th and 7th Avenue, Ridge, and alleged fraud by the Lands Commission. The Court of Appeal first set aside SSNIT’s additional grounds for lack of leave under rule 8(8). On the merits, the court held SSNIT failed to positively identify the disputed land: Exhibit E lacked boundary descriptions, pleadings did not describe Plot 63A, and SSNIT’s evidence was inconsistent with the plot leased to the 2nd Defendant. The MoU did not cover Plot No. 3, so no equitable or immediate title arose. Fraud was unproven under the Evidence Act’s beyond reasonable doubt standard. The appeal was dismissed and the High Court’s judgment affirmed.
LAWRENCE L. MENSAH, J.A.
This is an appeal against the judgment of the Land Division of the High Court, Accra dated the 23rd day of April 2018 against Plaintiff/Appellant who will be referred to as the Plaintiff, in favour of the 2nd Defendant/Respondent who will be referred to as the 2nd Defendant.
Facts:
In or about 1995, the Plaintiff entered into an Asset Swap Agreement (ASA) with the Government of Ghana through the then Ministry of Works and Housing represented by the 1st Defendant Lands Commission. The said Asset Swap Agreement was reduced into writing by a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed by the Plaintiff and the Government of Ghana on 4th January 2001. Under the said agreement, the Government agreed to release some bungalows and bare lands situate variously at Ridge and Cantonments to the Plaintiff in exchange for a number of executive bungalows at Cantonments, Ridge, Kanda and Switch Back-Road, all in Accra.
It is the further case of the Plaintiff that it had performed its side of the agreement by constructing and handing over to the Government six executive bungalows at 6th Avenue, North Ridge, six executive bungalows at Cantonments and forty-one 3-bedroom flats at Adenta with external infrastructural facilities.
The Plaintiff further averred that though the Government could not fulfil all its part of the agreement, it released bare lands or lands with buildings to the Plaintiff at Site “A” situate at 6th and 7th Avenue Ridge, Bare land developed into bungalows at Lands and Buildings known as Site “B”; Land and Building known as Site “C” situate off 5th Circular Road, Cantonments and Land and Buildings known as Plot No. 15, Ambassador Hotel Planning Scheme Ridge. Accra. The Plaintiff asserted that the disputed property is part of the land the Government had granted to the Plaintiff.
It is the further assertion of the Plaintiff that since the 1st Defendant Lands Commission was aware of the Asset Swap Agreement between the Plaintiff and the Government, it was wrongful and fraudulent on the part of the 1st Defendant to have gone ahead to transfer the disputed land to the 2nd Defendant. The Plaintiff contended that the grant to the 2nd Defendant is null and void. That the Land Certificate issued in favour of the 2nd Defendant by the 3rd Defendant Land Title Registry should therefore be cancelled on grounds of fraud.
It is the further case of the Plaintiff that considering the fact that at the time of the grant, the 2nd Defendant was Gh