Boateng Vrs Ntim-manu & Anor [2022] GHASC 67 (15 June 2022)

Boateng Vrs Ntim-manu & Anor [2022] GHASC 67 (15 June 2022)

The Supreme Court found that the Appellant's long, unchallenged possession, acts of ownership, and credible documentary evidence outweighed the Respondents' inconsistent and insufficiently proven claims. The Respondents' counterclaim failed for lack of proof, and their regularization of title with the Gbawe Kwatei family could not defeat the Appellant's adverse possession. The lower courts erred in disregarding the Appellant's evidence and in preferring the Respondents' case.

Citation
[2022] GHASC 67
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/appellant: Samuel K. Otu Boateng; 1st Defendant/respondent/respondent: Kofi Ntim-Manu; 2nd Defendant/respondent/respondent: Kings Lee Limited
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
15 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of Court of Appeal set aside; judgment entered for Appellant.
Legal Topics
Adverse Possession, Burden of Proof, Counterclaim, Fraud in Land Registration, Title to Land
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Burden of Proof Counterclaim Fraud in Land Registration Title to Land

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 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samuel K. Otu Boateng

Plaintiff/appellant/appellant

Kofi Ntim-Manu

1st Defendant/respondent/respondent

Kings Lee Limited

2nd Defendant/respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant's long possession and acts of ownership entitled him to declaration of title over the disputed land
  2. 2 Whether the Respondents proved their counterclaim to the requisite standard
  3. 3 Whether the lower courts erred in preferring the Respondents' case and disregarding the Appellant's evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court found that the Appellant's long, unchallenged possession, acts of ownership, and credible documentary evidence outweighed the Respondents' inconsistent and insufficiently proven claims. The Respondents' counterclaim failed for lack of proof, and their regularization of title with the Gbawe Kwatei family could not defeat the Appellant's adverse possession. The lower courts erred in disregarding the Appellant's evidence and in preferring the Respondents' case.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of Court of Appeal set aside; judgment entered for Appellant.

Orders

  • Declaration of title in favour of Appellant for the specified parcel of land at MaCarthy Hill, Accra
  • Recovery of possession by Appellant of any part of the land in Respondents' possession