Afari Vrs Manianor Ii & 2 Ors [2022] GHASC 51 (13 July 2022)

Afari Vrs Manianor Ii & 2 Ors [2022] GHASC 51 (13 July 2022)

The Respondent discharged her burden of proof by adducing credible evidence, including a conveyance and site plan, to establish the identity and boundaries of the 441.98 acres. The Appellants failed to provide credible evidence to contradict her claim or to establish a lesser entitlement. The statutory declaration was not the sole basis for the decision. The appeal therefore fails.

Citation
[2022] GHASC 51
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/respondent: Gladys Obenewaa Afari; Defendant/respondent/appellant: Nana Donkor Manianor II; Defendant/respondent/appellant: Daniel K. Ohene; Defendant/respondent/appellant: Kweku Nyamekye
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
13 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Declaration of Title to Land, Burden of Proof, Evaluation of Evidence, Statutory Declarations, Appeals Process
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Declaration of Title to Land Burden of Proof Evaluation of Evidence Statutory Declarations Appeals Process

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gladys Obenewaa Afari

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent

Nana Donkor Manianor II

Defendant/respondent/appellant

Daniel K. Ohene

Defendant/respondent/appellant

Kweku Nyamekye

Defendant/respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent is entitled to the whole parcel of 441.98 acres or only 30 acres as determined by the trial court
  2. 2 Whether the Respondent sufficiently proved the identity and boundaries of the land claimed
  3. 3 Whether the Court of Appeal erred in relying on a statutory declaration as evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The Respondent discharged her burden of proof by adducing credible evidence, including a conveyance and site plan, to establish the identity and boundaries of the 441.98 acres. The Appellants failed to provide credible evidence to contradict her claim or to establish a lesser entitlement. The statutory declaration was not the sole basis for the decision. The appeal therefore fails.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment of the Court of Appeal affirmed
  • Respondent entitled to all reliefs endorsed in her writ of summons, including declaration of title to 441.98 acres