THE CONVENTION PEOPLE’S PARTY (CPP) VS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL & ORS
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP, JUSTICE GIFTY AGYEI ADDO
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Corporate Law
- Evidence Law
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This High Court case involves the Convention People’s Party (CPP) seeking declarations and recovery of properties confiscated in 1966, including the 8-storey Republic House and Laterbiokorshie Estates (Nkrumah Flats), and a reversal of NADECO’s liquidation, against the Attorney General, a 2nd Defendant managing Republic House, and the Lands Commission. CPP argued that post‑1966 commissions investigated CPP-linked assets; NADECO’s properties were seized; and CPP was reconstituted in 2000 with the same symbols, making it the successor able to sue. Defendants contended lawful confiscation, lack of capacity, and limitation under the Limitations Act. The court prioritized capacity and limitation issues, rejected estoppel against statutory identity, emphasized corporate separateness of NADECO, noted NLCD 94 vested NADECO’s assets in the State, and cited Act 574/PNDCL 281 proscription rules. It held CPP lacked capacity and dismissed the suit, awarding costs, and observed the 12‑year bar would defeat recovery actions if adverse possession applied.
On 14th September, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a writ of summons and statement of claim against three Defendants in respect of some properties confiscated by the State in 1966. The Defendants are the 1st and 2nd Defendants herein and the State Housing Company as the 3rd Defendant. The writ of summons and statement of claim were subsequently amended on the 22nd of June, 2017, pursuant to the Order of the Court dated 23rd May, 2017, to join the Lands Commission to the suit as the 4th Defendant. The action as against the State Housing Company was discontinued on the 11th of October, 2018, for which reason there remained the three Defendants herein.
The amended writ of summons and statement of claim are endorsed with the following reliefs:
a. An order declaring the confiscation to the State of the 8-storey Republic House as property belonging to Dr. Kwame Nkrumah as wrongful, unlawful, unjust, and unwarranted having regard to the evidence available to the Azu Crabbe Commission and the Apaloo Commission.
b. An order directed at the Defendant to restore the two (2) properties to the Plaintiff forthwith.
c. An order declaring the confiscation of the Laterbiokorshie Estates (Nkrumah Flats) to the State as property belonging to Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah as wrongful, unlawful, unjustifiable, unjust, and in violation of the principles of law and equity.
d. An order directed at the Defendant to reverse the liquidation of the NADECO and restore possession, custody, and control of NADECO’s assets to the Plaintiff forthwith.
e. A declaration that the continued confiscation of the NADECO assets is discriminatory, unlawful, and unconstitutional.
f. An order for recovery of possession by Plaintiff of all NADECO assets.
g. An order directed at the Defendants to pay compensation to the Plaintiff from the date of wrongful confiscation, that is February 1966 to the date of final determination of this case.
h. An order declaring the lease of the Republic House by the 4th Defendant to the 2nd Defendant as invalid and void.
i. An order directed at the Defendants to pay all rents accruing from the 2 properties from the date of their confiscation in 1966 into the Registry of this Court.
j. Any further or other orders as this Honourable Court will deem fit.
THE PLAINTIFF’S CASE.
The crux of the Plaintiff’s claim as contained in its amended statement of claim is that the Government of Ghana led by the Convention’s Peoples Party (CPP) was overthrown by the National Liberati