Tafali Vrs Yakubu [2018] GHASC 28 (9 May 2018)

Tafali Vrs Yakubu [2018] GHASC 28 (9 May 2018)

The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal erred in substituting its own findings for those of the trial court, as the trial court's findings were supported by evidence and credibility assessments. The identity of the land was not in dispute, and any inconsistencies between pleadings and evidence were immaterial to the central issue of ownership. The trial court's decision to decree title in favour of the appellant was reinstated.

Citation
[2018] GHASC 28
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent/appellant: Iddrisu Tifuuuro Tatali; Defendant/appellant/respondent: Alhaji Saaka Yakubu
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
9 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment reinstated; respondent's counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Declaration of Title, Burden of Proof, Pleadings and Evidence, Appellate Review, Injunctions
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Declaration of Title Burden of Proof Pleadings and Evidence Appellate Review Injunctions

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Iddrisu Tifuuuro Tatali

Plaintiff/respondent/appellant

Alhaji Saaka Yakubu

Defendant/appellant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal erred in overturning the High Court's judgment on the basis of weight of evidence, proof of boundaries, and alleged conflict between pleadings and evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal erred in substituting its own findings for those of the trial court, as the trial court's findings were supported by evidence and credibility assessments. The identity of the land was not in dispute, and any inconsistencies between pleadings and evidence were immaterial to the central issue of ownership. The trial court's decision to decree title in favour of the appellant was reinstated.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment reinstated; respondent's counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Plaintiff/appellant granted declaration of title to the disputed land.
  • Perpetual injunction granted restraining defendant/respondent and successors from interfering with plaintiff's enjoyment of the land.