BOASIAKO VRS. NANA ADJEI PANIN (J4/41/2021) [2022] GHASC 127 (14 December 2022)

BOASIAKO VRS. NANA ADJEI PANIN (J4/41/2021) [2022] GHASC 127 (14 December 2022)

The Supreme Court held that the 1927 Native Tribunal judgment established the boundary between Abonu and Deduako stools, and that the defendant's acts constituted trespass on the plaintiff's land. The Court of Appeal misapprehended the evidence and misapplied the law by reversing the High Court's findings, which were supported by the preponderance of evidence and corroborated by historical and contemporary testimony. Procedural defects in the notice of appeal were not fundamental and did not render the appeal a nullity. The doctrine of res judicata applied to the boundary issue, and the plaintiff proved superior title and entitlement to the disputed land.

Citation
[2022] GHASC 127
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent/appellant: Nana Otuo Antwi Boasiako; Defendant/appellant/respondent: Nana Adjei Panin
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
14 December 2022
Case Number
J4/41/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Court of Appeal judgment reversed; High Court judgment restored in favor of plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Boundary Disputes, Title to Land, Trespass, Res Judicata, Appellate Procedure
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Boundary Disputes Title to Land Trespass Res Judicata Appellate Procedure

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

Parties

Nana Otuo Antwi Boasiako

Plaintiff/respondent/appellant

Nana Adjei Panin

Defendant/appellant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal erred in reversing the High Court's judgment in favor of the plaintiff regarding title and trespass to the disputed land.
  2. 2 Whether the 1927 Native Tribunal judgment is res judicata as to the boundary between Abonu and Deduako stools.
  3. 3 Whether procedural defects in the notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal rendered the appeal a nullity.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the 1927 Native Tribunal judgment established the boundary between Abonu and Deduako stools, and that the defendant's acts constituted trespass on the plaintiff's land. The Court of Appeal misapprehended the evidence and misapplied the law by reversing the High Court's findings, which were supported by the preponderance of evidence and corroborated by historical and contemporary testimony. Procedural defects in the notice of appeal were not fundamental and did not render the appeal a nullity. The doctrine of res judicata applied to the boundary issue, and the plaintiff proved superior title and entitlement to the disputed land.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Court of Appeal judgment reversed; High Court judgment restored in favor of plaintiff.

Orders

  • Declaration of title to and recovery of possession of Abornu land (938 acres) in favor of plaintiff.
  • Damages for trespass awarded to plaintiff at 40,000 Ghana cedis.