BOADU VRS. LA-NKWANTANANG AND ANOTHER (LD/0705/2021) [2024] GHAHC 144 (26 July 2024)

BOADU VRS. LA-NKWANTANANG AND ANOTHER (LD/0705/2021) [2024] GHAHC 144 (26 July 2024)

The Plaintiff is entitled to access to her property as per the planning scheme, and the 1st Defendant has statutory authority to create such access and demolish obstructions. The 2nd Defendant, though possessing a building permit, failed to comply with its terms, resulting in lawful demolition. The 2nd Defendant's claim for damages fails as any loss was self-inflicted by non-compliance with statutory requirements.

Citation
BOADU VRS. LA-NKWANTANANG AND ANOTHER (LD/0705/2021) [2024] GHAHC 144 (26 July 2024)
Parties
Plaintiff: Comfort Amoa Boadu; 1st Defendant: La-Nkwantanang-Madina Municipal Assembly; 2nd Defendant: Unknown (2nd Defendant)
Court
ghahc
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
26 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (land Dispute) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claims granted; 2nd Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Easements and Rights of Way, Building Permits, Statutory Powers of Local Authorities, Injunctions, Damages
Source Language
eng
Land Law Local Government Law Easements and Rights of Way Building Permits Statutory Powers of Local Authorities Injunctions Damages

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Comfort Amoa Boadu

Plaintiff

La-Nkwantanang-Madina Municipal Assembly

1st Defendant

Unknown (2nd Defendant)

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (land Dispute) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to access to her property under the planning scheme
  2. 2 Whether the 1st Defendant has statutory authority to create access roads and enforce planning schemes
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd Defendant had a valid building permit and complied with its terms

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff is entitled to access to her property as per the planning scheme, and the 1st Defendant has statutory authority to create such access and demolish obstructions. The 2nd Defendant, though possessing a building permit, failed to comply with its terms, resulting in lawful demolition. The 2nd Defendant's claim for damages fails as any loss was self-inflicted by non-compliance with statutory requirements.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claims granted; 2nd Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Declaration that Plaintiff is entitled to access to her house in conformity with the North Oyarifa Residential Planning Scheme of the 1st Defendant.
  • Order to the 1st Defendant to create access to the Plaintiff’s property in conformity with its planning scheme.