Ayoreko Joseph Agesika Vrs Albert Sarquah & Anor. [2022] GHACC 77 (29 December 2022)

Ayoreko Joseph Agesika Vrs Albert Sarquah & Anor. [2022] GHACC 77 (29 December 2022)

The defendants have a superior title to the disputed land, having acquired it in 2005 from the Osu Wem family, prior to the plaintiff’s purported acquisition in 2013. The Osu Wem family had already divested itself of title and could not convey valid title to the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s land certificate is not conclusive proof of ownership where the grantor had no title to pass. The plaintiff failed to conduct prudent investigations and was not a bona fide purchaser for value without notice. The defendants’ counterclaim succeeds; the plaintiff’s claims are dismissed.

Citation
[2022] GHACC 77
Parties
Plaintiff: Ayoreko Joseph Agesika; 1st Defendant: Albert Sarquah; 2nd Defendant: Zertha Ahima
Court
Circuit Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
29 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Land Dispute / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff’s claim dismissed; Defendants’ counterclaim granted.
Legal Topics
Title to Land, Trespass, Counterclaim, Rectification of Land Register, Bona Fide Purchaser, Equitable Doctrines
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Title to Land Trespass Counterclaim Rectification of Land Register Bona Fide Purchaser Equitable Doctrines

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

Parties

Ayoreko Joseph Agesika

Plaintiff

Albert Sarquah

1st Defendant

Zertha Ahima

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Land Dispute / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is the owner of the land in dispute
  2. 2 Whether the defendants are the owners of the land in dispute
  3. 3 Whether the defendants have trespassed on plaintiff’s land

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants have a superior title to the disputed land, having acquired it in 2005 from the Osu Wem family, prior to the plaintiff’s purported acquisition in 2013. The Osu Wem family had already divested itself of title and could not convey valid title to the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s land certificate is not conclusive proof of ownership where the grantor had no title to pass. The plaintiff failed to conduct prudent investigations and was not a bona fide purchaser for value without notice. The defendants’ counterclaim succeeds; the plaintiff’s claims are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff’s claim dismissed; Defendants’ counterclaim granted.

Orders

  • Declaration that defendants are owners of the disputed land as described.
  • Rectification of the land register by cancelling plaintiff’s Land Certificate No TD.13848.