Takyi & Anor Vrs Wireko & Anor [2022] GHASC 31 (14 December 2022)

Takyi & Anor Vrs Wireko & Anor [2022] GHASC 31 (14 December 2022)

The Appellants' action was statute barred, having been filed over twenty-five years after they became aware of the Respondents' adverse claim. The evidence overwhelmingly supported the Respondents' case that the transaction was a sale, not a pledge, and the Appellants and their predecessors acquiesced in the Respondents' ownership for decades. No error of law or fact was committed by the lower courts.

Citation
[2022] GHASC 31
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/appellant: Juliana Coleman Takyi; Plaintiff/appellant/appellant: Catherine Coleman; Defendant/respondent/respondent: Mrs. Grace Wireko @ Abena Mabere; Defendant/respondent/respondent: Regina Wireko
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
14 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in its entirety
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Laches and Acquiescence, Title to Land, Sale Vs. Pledge of Property, Appellate Review
Source Language
English
Property Law Civil Procedure Limitation of Actions Laches and Acquiescence Title to Land Sale Vs. Pledge of Property Appellate Review

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Juliana Coleman Takyi

Plaintiff/appellant/appellant

Catherine Coleman

Plaintiff/appellant/appellant

Mrs. Grace Wireko @ Abena Mabere

Defendant/respondent/respondent

Regina Wireko

Defendant/respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lower courts erred in dismissing the Appellants' claim to the property and upholding the Respondents' counterclaim
  2. 2 Whether the Appellants' action was statute barred by limitation
  3. 3 Whether the transaction was a sale or a pledge

Ratio Decidendi

The Appellants' action was statute barred, having been filed over twenty-five years after they became aware of the Respondents' adverse claim. The evidence overwhelmingly supported the Respondents' case that the transaction was a sale, not a pledge, and the Appellants and their predecessors acquiesced in the Respondents' ownership for decades. No error of law or fact was committed by the lower courts.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in its entirety

Orders

  • Costs of Thirty Thousand Ghana cedis (GH¢ 30,000.00) awarded against the Appellants in favour of the Respondents