Blackmore v Klutse (J4/38/2024) [2025] GHASC 30 (30 April 2025)

Blackmore v Klutse (J4/38/2024) [2025] GHASC 30 (30 April 2025)

The Supreme Court found that the Plaintiff's evidence, including the land certificate and the surveyor's composite plan, established his title and possession over the disputed land. The Defendant's site plan did not correspond to the land he occupied, and his counterclaim was not supported by credible evidence. The lower courts erred in granting the Defendant's counterclaim and dismissing the Plaintiff's claim, as the Plaintiff's title was earlier in time, properly registered, and unrebutted. The Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of title, recovery of possession, and a perpetual injunction against the Defendant.

Citation
[2025] GHASC 30
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/appellant: Larry Blackmore; Defendant/respondent/respondent: Bernard Klutse
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
30 April 2025
Case Number
J4/38/2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgments of High Court and Court of Appeal set aside.
Legal Topics
Declaration of Title, Trespass, Recovery of Possession, Perpetual Injunction, Land Registration, Boundary Disputes
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Declaration of Title Trespass Recovery of Possession Perpetual Injunction Land Registration Boundary Disputes

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Larry Blackmore

Plaintiff/appellant/appellant

Bernard Klutse

Defendant/respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of title to the disputed land
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant trespassed on the Plaintiff's land
  3. 3 Whether the Defendant's counterclaim for title should be upheld

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court found that the Plaintiff's evidence, including the land certificate and the surveyor's composite plan, established his title and possession over the disputed land. The Defendant's site plan did not correspond to the land he occupied, and his counterclaim was not supported by credible evidence. The lower courts erred in granting the Defendant's counterclaim and dismissing the Plaintiff's claim, as the Plaintiff's title was earlier in time, properly registered, and unrebutted. The Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of title, recovery of possession, and a perpetual injunction against the Defendant.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgments of High Court and Court of Appeal set aside.

Orders

  • Declaration that Plaintiff is owner of the described land
  • Recovery of possession of any portion of Plaintiff's land occupied by Defendant