MARK ADU PREMPEH VS SAMUEL ANKRAH (KH1/06/22) [2024] GHACA 1 (25 January 2024)

MARK ADU PREMPEH VS SAMUEL ANKRAH (KH1/06/22) [2024] GHACA 1 (25 January 2024)

The 3rd Defendant failed to establish acquisition of the land from the rightful grantor, failed to prove twelve years of open, visible, and unchallenged possession, and did not have a valid grant. The Plaintiff's root of title was established, and the trial judge's findings were amply supported by the evidence. The appeal fails as the 3rd Defendant's defences of adverse possession, limitation, laches, and acquiescence were not proven.

Citation
MARK ADU PREMPEH VS SAMUEL ANKRAH (KH1/06/22) [2024] GHACA 1 (25 January 2024)
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Mark Adu Prempeh; 1st Defendant: Samuel Ankrah; 2nd Defendant: Dreke; 3rd Defendant/appellant: Abigail Safo
Court
ghaca
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
25 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment of trial court upheld
Legal Topics
Declaration of Title to Land, Adverse Possession, Limitation, Laches and Acquiescence, Estoppel, Fraudulent Conveyance
Source Language
eng
Property Law Civil Procedure Declaration of Title to Land Adverse Possession Limitation Laches and Acquiescence Estoppel Fraudulent Conveyance

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 8 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Adu Prempeh

Plaintiff/respondent

Samuel Ankrah

1st Defendant

Dreke

2nd Defendant

Abigail Safo

3rd Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Plaintiff acquired the subject land from the rightful owner
  2. 2 Whether Plaintiff is able to show the demarcation of his land
  3. 3 Whether Plaintiff is in possession of the land

Ratio Decidendi

The 3rd Defendant failed to establish acquisition of the land from the rightful grantor, failed to prove twelve years of open, visible, and unchallenged possession, and did not have a valid grant. The Plaintiff's root of title was established, and the trial judge's findings were amply supported by the evidence. The appeal fails as the 3rd Defendant's defences of adverse possession, limitation, laches, and acquiescence were not proven.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment of trial court upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Judgment for Plaintiff/Respondent