Boya Vrs Mohammed and Another [2018] GHASC 7 (14 February 2018)

Boya Vrs Mohammed and Another [2018] GHASC 7 (14 February 2018)

The defendants' father had a prior valid grant and possession of the land, making the plaintiff's subsequent grant null and void. The Court of Appeal was correct to reverse the trial court as its decision was unsupported by evidence. The defendants, as intestate successors, had capacity to defend and counterclaim.

Citation
[2018] GHASC 7
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent/appellant: Adisa Boya; Defendant/appellant/respondent: Zenabu Mohammed (substituted by Adama Mohammed); Defendant/appellant/respondent: Mujeeb
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
14 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Court of Appeal decision affirmed; plaintiff's action dismissed; judgment for defendants on counterclaim.
Legal Topics
Title to Land, Customary Law, Intestate Succession, Appeals, Counterclaim Capacity
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Title to Land Customary Law Intestate Succession Appeals Counterclaim Capacity

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adisa Boya

Plaintiff/respondent/appellant

Zenabu Mohammed (substituted by Adama Mohammed)

Defendant/appellant/respondent

Mujeeb

Defendant/appellant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who has a better title to the disputed land?
  2. 2 Was the Court of Appeal right to reverse the trial court's decision?
  3. 3 Did the defendants have capacity to counterclaim without letters of administration?

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants' father had a prior valid grant and possession of the land, making the plaintiff's subsequent grant null and void. The Court of Appeal was correct to reverse the trial court as its decision was unsupported by evidence. The defendants, as intestate successors, had capacity to defend and counterclaim.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Court of Appeal decision affirmed; plaintiff's action dismissed; judgment for defendants on counterclaim.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's action dismissed.
  • Judgment entered for defendants on their counterclaim.