Afrah Vrs Pokuaa and Others [2023] GHAHC 114 (14 March 2023)

Afrah Vrs Pokuaa and Others [2023] GHAHC 114 (14 March 2023)

Plaintiff/Appellant failed to adequately describe the land claimed and did not prove entitlement to reliefs. Procedural errors in Suit 2 did not occasion grave miscarriage of justice. Both Defendants' developments were within their acquired plots. The trial court's dismissal of Plaintiff's claims was proper and is affirmed.

Citation
Afrah Vrs Pokuaa and Others [2023] GHAHC 114 (14 March 2023)
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Adwoa Afrah for herself and on behalf of Asona Family, Diaso; Defendant/respondent: Maame Pokuaa; Defendant/respondent: Yaa Wassa; Defendant/respondent: Gyamfuaa
Court
ghahc
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
14 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (consolidated Suits) / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed; trial court judgments affirmed
Legal Topics
Declaration of Title to Land, Trespass, Injunction, Acquiescence, Statute of Limitation, Procedural Irregularity, Consolidation of Suits
Source Language
eng
Property Law Civil Procedure Declaration of Title to Land Trespass Injunction Acquiescence Statute of Limitation Procedural Irregularity +1 more

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adwoa Afrah for herself and on behalf of Asona Family, Diaso

Plaintiff/appellant

Maame Pokuaa

Defendant/respondent

Yaa Wassa

Defendant/respondent

Gyamfuaa

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (consolidated Suits) / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in its findings regarding the boundaries and ownership of the disputed land
  2. 2 Whether procedural irregularities in Suit 2 affected the outcome
  3. 3 Whether Plaintiff/Appellant proved entitlement to the reliefs sought

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff/Appellant failed to adequately describe the land claimed and did not prove entitlement to reliefs. Procedural errors in Suit 2 did not occasion grave miscarriage of justice. Both Defendants' developments were within their acquired plots. The trial court's dismissal of Plaintiff's claims was proper and is affirmed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; trial court judgments affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal against judgments in Suit 1 and Suit 2 dismissed
  • District Court, Diaso judgments dated 4-11-2020 affirmed