JOSEPH JOHN RADDY & OTHERS VS NANA TUTU AMPEM II (H1/28/2022) [2022] GHACA 68 (28 April 2022)

JOSEPH JOHN RADDY & OTHERS VS NANA TUTU AMPEM II (H1/28/2022) [2022] GHACA 68 (28 April 2022)

The 1955 document was a tenancy agreement, not an assignment; Plaintiff/Respondent was better entitled to renewal of the lease; Lands Commission acted unfairly by not hearing Respondent and granting lease to Appellants based on a misdescription; Appellants were not bona fide purchasers and had no title to assign; all grounds of appeal dismissed.

Citation
[2022] GHACA 68
Parties
Defendant/appellant: Joseph John Raddy; Defendant/appellant: John Bitar; Defendant/appellant: Vikil Abdulla Essaka (substituted by Yusif Ibrahim); Defendant/appellant: Abubaka Essaka; Plaintiff/respondent: Nana Tutu Ampem II for himself and the Stool Land People of Akyinakrom, Ashanti
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
28 April 2022
Case Number
H1/28/2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; trial court judgment affirmed.
Legal Topics
Tenancy Agreement Vs Assignment, Renewal of Lease, Title to Land, Statute Bar, Misdescription/misnomer, Exercise of Discretion by Lands Commission, Bona Fide Purchaser, Natural Justice
Source Language
English
Land Law Property Law Civil Procedure Tenancy Agreement Vs Assignment Renewal of Lease Title to Land Statute Bar Misdescription/misnomer +3 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 6 Authorities cited 30 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph John Raddy

Defendant/appellant

John Bitar

Defendant/appellant

Vikil Abdulla Essaka (substituted by Yusif Ibrahim)

Defendant/appellant

Abubaka Essaka

Defendant/appellant

Nana Tutu Ampem II for himself and the Stool Land People of Akyinakrom, Ashanti

Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1955 document was a tenancy agreement or assignment
  2. 2 Whether Plaintiff was better entitled to renewal of the head lease
  3. 3 Whether the action was statute-barred

Ratio Decidendi

The 1955 document was a tenancy agreement, not an assignment; Plaintiff/Respondent was better entitled to renewal of the lease; Lands Commission acted unfairly by not hearing Respondent and granting lease to Appellants based on a misdescription; Appellants were not bona fide purchasers and had no title to assign; all grounds of appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; trial court judgment affirmed.

Orders

  • 3rd and 4th Defendants to yield possession and occupation of the four storerooms on plot no OTB 106 Adum Kumasi to Akyiawkrom Stool forthwith.
  • Cancellation of the lease issued in favour of Aisha Nana.