VICTORIA BOSOMPRAH v. TEMA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION & ELIAS AGOBO & EMMANUEL AGOBO
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- Alexander Osei Tutu J.
Areas of Law
- Property Law
- Contract Law
- Evidence Law
- Equity
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Plaintiff, who took over her late sister's block factory business, applied for a lease but was only granted a licence by the first Defendant. The Plaintiff's claim that the demolition of her structures by the first Defendant was unlawful was dismissed as the court found the grant to be a licence and not a lease. The first Defendant was justified in demolishing the structures after the expiration of the licence.
JUDGMENT
The facts of this case are far from complex. In 1995, the late Theresa Bosomprah applied for a lease from the first Defendant to operate a block factory on the land under the name Thexy Block Works.
The Plaintiff is the sister of the said Theresa Bosomprah, who bit the dust on 3rd May 2002. She took over the running of her sister’s block factory business in her capacity as the customary successor. The first Defendant is a statutory corporation in charge of the planning, management and development of lands in Tema and its environs, including the land located at Ashaiman being contested in this Court.
The Plaintiff used to pay yearly rent to the first Defendant until in 2007, when the first Defendant refused to collect the rent from the Plaintiff. On 17th August 2010, the Task Force of the first Defendant entered the Plaintiff’s land and demolished the structures on it, following complaints received from the second and third Defendants and a Judgment of the High Court, Tema. The Plaintiff finds the demolishing exercise carried out on the land by the first Defendant unlawful and discriminatory.
It was for the above reasons that on 14th September 2010, the Plaintiff instituted the present action against the Defendants. The reliefs that were endorsed on her writ of summons were:
An order that there existed a proper and lawful tenancy agreement renewable annually between the plaintiff and the first Defendant.
An order that the demolishing carried out by the Defendants on 17th August 2018 was unlawful and discriminatory and must be pronounced as such.
An order reinstating the plaintiff as a tenant on the land with full rights.
Perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from going ahead and re-allocating or furthering the re-allocation of the subject-matter land to any third party.
Special damages of GH ₵34,780.00 being the cost of equipment damaged by the Defendants in the process of demolition exercise.
All the Defendants were served personally, but the matter was a two-horse race between the Plaintiff and the first Defendant. The first Defendant entered an appearance and proceeded to file its defence on 5th November 2010. The second and third Defendants did not file any process, although they appeared in Court during the trial and even had the opportunity to cross-examine the parties. On 26th October 2016, the Court adopted the issues raised by counsel for the Plaintiff and the first Defendant in the application for directions and additi