Graham & Anor Vrs Brown-danquah & 3 [2022] GHASC 58 (15 June 2022)

Graham & Anor Vrs Brown-danquah & 3 [2022] GHASC 58 (15 June 2022)

The Plaintiffs established a credible root of title to the disputed land through the Will of their predecessor, subsequent acts of registration, and consistent overt acts of ownership. The Defendants failed to prove a better title or exclusive possession. The trial court's finding of fraud was not supported by the required standard of proof, and the forensic evidence was unreliable. The Court of Appeal's decision to grant the Plaintiffs' reliefs was correct and is affirmed.

Citation
[2022] GHASC 58
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/respondent: Dr. Eric Graham; Plaintiff/appellant/respondent: Carmin Aba Amonua Graham; Defendant/respondent/appellant: Mrs. Vivian Aku Brown-Danquah; Defendant/respondent/appellant: Adorku Akuffo; Defendant/respondent/appellant: Benjamin Acquaye Hammond; Defendant/respondent/appellant: Faisal Mohamed Saka
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
15 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. Court of Appeal decision affirmed. Judgment for Plaintiffs.
Legal Topics
Title to Land, Wills and Probate, Evidence, Boundary Disputes, Fraud Allegations
Source Language
English
Land Law Succession Law Title to Land Wills and Probate Evidence Boundary Disputes Fraud Allegations

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 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. Eric Graham

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent

Carmin Aba Amonua Graham

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent

Mrs. Vivian Aku Brown-Danquah

Defendant/respondent/appellant

Adorku Akuffo

Defendant/respondent/appellant

Benjamin Acquaye Hammond

Defendant/respondent/appellant

Faisal Mohamed Saka

Defendant/respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiffs established root of title to the disputed land through the Will of their predecessor
  2. 2 Whether the trial court erred in making findings of fraud against the Plaintiffs
  3. 3 Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in reversing the High Court's decision and granting reliefs to the Plaintiffs

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiffs established a credible root of title to the disputed land through the Will of their predecessor, subsequent acts of registration, and consistent overt acts of ownership. The Defendants failed to prove a better title or exclusive possession. The trial court's finding of fraud was not supported by the required standard of proof, and the forensic evidence was unreliable. The Court of Appeal's decision to grant the Plaintiffs' reliefs was correct and is affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. Court of Appeal decision affirmed. Judgment for Plaintiffs.

Orders

  • Plaintiffs granted recovery of possession of the land as delineated in Exhibit B and the composite plan CE.
  • Defendants, their agents, assigns, privies, workmen and servants are perpetually restrained from entering or dealing with the land in any way detrimental to the Plaintiffs' interest.