Asem & Anor Vrs Makaku & Anor [2022] GHASC 87 (25 May 2022)

Asem & Anor Vrs Makaku & Anor [2022] GHASC 87 (25 May 2022)

The Supreme Court held that the evidence established a valid customary arbitration to which both parties voluntarily submitted, the proceedings were conducted in a judicial manner, and an award was published. Acceptance of the award by both parties is not required for its validity. The Court of Appeal was correct in setting aside the Circuit Court judgment and binding the parties to the arbitral award.

Citation
[2022] GHASC 87
Parties
Defendant/respondent/appellant/appellant: Kofi Tsu Asem (deceased) (substituted by Sylvanus Asem); Defendant/respondent/appellant/appellant: Dogbatse; Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent: Togbe Ahotor Makaku (deceased) (substituted by Hiob Ahotor); Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent: W. N. Kporku (deceased) (substituted by Israel Kporku)
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
25 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court)
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Customary Arbitration, Land Ownership, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Appeals Process, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Land Law Customary Law Civil Procedure Customary Arbitration Land Ownership Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Appeals Process Burden of Proof

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kofi Tsu Asem (deceased) (substituted by Sylvanus Asem)

Defendant/respondent/appellant/appellant

Dogbatse

Defendant/respondent/appellant/appellant

Togbe Ahotor Makaku (deceased) (substituted by Hiob Ahotor)

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent

W. N. Kporku (deceased) (substituted by Israel Kporku)

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal properly evaluated the evidence and the case of the defendants as against the plaintiffs
  2. 2 Whether there was a valid customary arbitration binding on both parties
  3. 3 Whether acceptance of an arbitral award is required for its validity

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the evidence established a valid customary arbitration to which both parties voluntarily submitted, the proceedings were conducted in a judicial manner, and an award was published. Acceptance of the award by both parties is not required for its validity. The Court of Appeal was correct in setting aside the Circuit Court judgment and binding the parties to the arbitral award.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Decision of the Court of Appeal affirmed
  • GH¢10,000.00 general damages for trespass awarded to plaintiffs