THE REPUBLIC v. NEWMONT GHANA GOLD LIMITED & ORS
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- BARBARA ACKAH-YENSU JA (PRESIDING)
- OBENG-MANU JNR JA
- RICHARD ADJEI-FRIMPONG JA
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Four appellants from Kenyasi sought judicial review against Newmont Ghana Gold Limited, the Minister responsible for mines, and the Attorney‑General after being denied compensation for disturbance of their surface rights within a declared mining area in Ahafo. Newmont had obtained a lease in 2001 and declared the mining area in 2004; compensation was paid between 2004 and 2006 based on a crop enumeration. The appellants claimed ownership/occupation of demarcated parcels with teak and seasonal crops and pressed the Minister to determine compensation. The High Court dismissed their application for declarations and mandamus. On appeal, Adjei‑Frimpong JA held that judicial review is discretionary and focuses on process, not merits; disputed factual issues like title and occupation cannot be resolved on affidavits. Although the trial judge erred by relying on a post‑filing ministerial letter (Exhibit RA3) to refuse mandamus, the application remained premature because the Minister’s statutory role under the mining laws is limited to fixing amounts once parties fail to agree, not adjudicating entitlement. The court further ruled that Order 55 rule 8 could not be invoked to continue the matter as by writ given the mixed public/private reliefs and statutory procedure, and it dismissed the appeal.
RICHARD ADJEI-FRIMPONG JA;
This litigation has ensued from the mining exploits of Newmont Ghana Gold Limited, the 1st respondent herein.
Sometime in 2001, the government of Ghana granted a mining lease over a large tract of land in the Kenyasi area in the now Ahafo region to the mining giant. Sequel to the grant, the 1st respondent in February 2004, declared a portion of the land comprised in the lease as a mining area for purposes of its full mining operations. It then embarked on a process to pay compensation for disturbance of surface rights in accordance with the provisions of Section 71 of the Minerals and Mining Law (1986), PNDCL 153, then applicable. The process was said to involve crop enumeration/survey of all farms falling within the mining area and the issuance of crop chit prepared for farm owners and lawful occupiers of the land.
Few years later between 2004 and 2006, based on the crop enumeration/survey, compensations were paid to those captured in the exercise. These are facts that do not admit of any disputation.
Trouble however began when the four appellants herein, who claimed to be owners and lawful occupiers of various portions of the land in the mining area with teak trees and other seasonal crops thereon, were denied payment of compensation, though, according to them, their land had been demarcated and marked for the purpose.
The appellants’ relentless demand for compensation over the period, marked by several correspondence traded among them and the respondents, the 2nd and 3rd, being the Minister responsible for mines and the Attorney General respectively, culminated, in the commencement of the judicial review action now on appeal before us.
At the court below, the appellants sought, as applicants, the following reliefs:
a. A declaration that the applicants are entitled to prompt, fair and adequate compensation from the 1st respondent for the disturbance of the surface rights of the applicants.
b. A declaration that the delay by the 1st and/or 2nd respondent to determine the compensation due the applicants as a result of the disturbance of the applicants’ surface rights, constitutes a neglect or refusal on the part of the 2nd respondent to determine the compensation due the applicants.
c. An order of mandamus directed at the 2nd respondent compelling it to promptly determine and order the 1st respondent to pay the exact compensation due the applicants for the disturbance of the surface rights of the applicants within 30 day