UNIVERSITY OF CAPE COAST VS KWAME OWUSUMAH
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE BERNARD BENTIL
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Equity and Trusts
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Plaintiff, University of Cape Coast, claimed the Defendant trespassed on its land, acquired under an executive directive. Despite Plaintiff's notice, the Defendant developed the land over 25 years. The court recognized the land acquisition but dismissed the Plaintiff's suit, citing laches, acquiescence, and Plaintiff's prolonged inaction, thus favoring the Defendant.
This Court is being invited to grant the following reliefs in favour of the Plaintiff, a renowned public university in Ghana: a. A declaration that the parcel of land which the Defendant has built upon opposite the University of Cape Coast Medical School hostel near the Cape Coast New Sports Stadium, forms part of a large stretch of land compulsorily acquired by the State under the Executive Instrument 1972 (E. I. 13) as site for University College, Cape Coast, now University of Cape Coast; b. A declaration that the Defendant has trespassed unto the Plaintiff’s land compulsorily acquired by the State under E. I. 13 for the exclusive use by the Plaintiff University; c. An order for recovery of possession of the said parcel of land; d. An order of the court to demolish the Defendant’s property unlawfully constructed on the Plaintiff’s land at the cost to the Defendant; e. General damages for trespass; f. Cost of litigation including legal fees g. Any other relief(s) as the Court may deem fit to grant.
The Plaintiff’s case is that the Government of Ghana compulsorily acquired a large stretch of land measuring 6. 22 square miles under the Executive Instrument 1972 (E. I. 13) with the schedule describing the land as site for University College, Cape Coast, now University of Cape Coast. The parcel of lands acquired by the Government of Ghana were allocated and entrusted to the Plaintiff.
Subsequent to the said acquisition, the Land Valuation Division of the Lands Commission was tasked to compile a list of all the original owners of the lands compulsorily acquired and assess the value of the land for purposes of compensation.
Over Ninety-fine per cent (95%) of the entire lands acquired were fully compensated.
Payment of compensation for the remaining five per cent (5%) were withheld because of conflicting claims from different families.
The Plaintiff states that, over the years some persons have been encroaching on the Plaintiff’s land against strong resistance from the Plaintiff in the form of, inter alia, radio announcement, security patrols, writing of ‘stop work’ on ongoing construction work on the land.
On a number of occasions, the Plaintiff finds it difficult to identify the actual encroachers for the purpose of serving them notices to stop work since they encroach through their workers and on the blind side of the Plaintiff.
According to the Plaintiff, on some occasions, the Plaintiff exercises its right under the Public Lands(Protection) Decree, 1974 (NRCD 240) to for