Kruwa Vrs Nkansah & Another [2022] GHADC 101 (29 November 2022)

Kruwa Vrs Nkansah & Another [2022] GHADC 101 (29 November 2022)

Plaintiff established root of title by tracing ownership to her father, who gifted her the land, corroborated by witness evidence and acts of possession. Defendants failed to provide credible evidence of title or possession. The boundary between the parties is the Bourbon stream, and defendants' crossing constituted trespass. Plaintiff proved her case on the balance of probabilities.

Citation
[2022] GHADC 101
Parties
Plaintiff: Ama Kruwa; 1st Defendant: Kwaku Nkansah; 2nd Defendant: Kwabena Bei
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
29 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Land Dispute / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff
Legal Topics
Title to Land, Trespass, Injunction, Damages, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Title to Land Trespass Injunction Damages Burden of Proof

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

Parties

Ama Kruwa

Plaintiff

Kwaku Nkansah

1st Defendant

Kwabena Bei

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Land Dispute / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the disputed land is the property of the plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff has valid title to the land
  3. 3 Whether the defendants trespassed onto the land

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff established root of title by tracing ownership to her father, who gifted her the land, corroborated by witness evidence and acts of possession. Defendants failed to provide credible evidence of title or possession. The boundary between the parties is the Bourbon stream, and defendants' crossing constituted trespass. Plaintiff proved her case on the balance of probabilities.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

  • Declaration that the disputed farmland is the property of the plaintiff
  • Plaintiff to recover full possession of the land