HOPPER VRS KWETIA (J4/45/2023) [2023] GHASC 102 (24 January 2023)

HOPPER VRS KWETIA (J4/45/2023) [2023] GHASC 102 (24 January 2023)

The plaintiff, as a member and elder of the Royal Nsona Family of Nkanfoa, possessed usufructuary rights over the disputed land, which were interfered with by the defendant's unauthorized acts. The defendant, as Odikro and trustee, could not unilaterally extinguish or disregard these rights. Previous judgments did not estop the plaintiff from asserting these rights. The appeal was dismissed, and the lower courts' decisions affirmed.

Citation
[2023] GHASC 102
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent/respondent: Simon Hopper (suing for and on behalf of the Royal Nsona Family of Nkanfoa); Defendant/appellant/appellant: Kwesi Kwetia
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
24 January 2023
Case Number
J4/45/2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court)
Outcome
appeal dismissed; judgment of Court of Appeal affirmed
Legal Topics
Usufructuary Rights, Family Land Disputes, Customary Land Tenure, Trusteeship of Stool Lands, Trespass, Estoppel
Source Language
English
Land Law Customary Law Trust Law Usufructuary Rights Family Land Disputes Customary Land Tenure Trusteeship of Stool Lands Trespass +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simon Hopper (suing for and on behalf of the Royal Nsona Family of Nkanfoa)

Plaintiff/respondent/respondent

Kwesi Kwetia

Defendant/appellant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant interfered with the plaintiff's usufructuary rights over the disputed land
  2. 2 Whether such interference constituted trespass
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff had capacity to sue

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff, as a member and elder of the Royal Nsona Family of Nkanfoa, possessed usufructuary rights over the disputed land, which were interfered with by the defendant's unauthorized acts. The defendant, as Odikro and trustee, could not unilaterally extinguish or disregard these rights. Previous judgments did not estop the plaintiff from asserting these rights. The appeal was dismissed, and the lower courts' decisions affirmed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; judgment of Court of Appeal affirmed

Orders

  • Defendant restrained from interfering with plaintiff's usufructuary rights over the disputed land
  • Nominal damages of 2,000 GHC awarded to plaintiff for destruction of trees and crops