Okoe and Another Vrs Lawani [2021] GHASC 98 (8 December 2021)

Okoe and Another Vrs Lawani [2021] GHASC 98 (8 December 2021)

The majority held that both parties' traditional evidence was unreliable, but the defendants established long, undisturbed possession and acts of ownership, which the plaintiffs admitted and failed to rebut. Plaintiffs did not meet the burden of proof for title, and the concurrent findings of the lower courts were supported by the evidence. The appeal was dismissed. The dissent found that the plaintiffs proved a better claim to the land through credible evidence from their grantor family, while the defendants' root of title was inconsistent and unsupported. The dissent would have allowed the appeal, granted the plaintiffs' claims, and awarded damages.

Citation
[2021] GHASC 98
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Daniel Ramsey Adjei Okoe; Plaintiff/appellant: Martin Adjei Sowah; Defendant/respondent: Nii Akwetey Lawani; Defendant/respondent: Samuel Adjei Ashong
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
8 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed (majority); lower court judgments affirmed. Dissent would have allowed the appeal and granted plaintiffs' claims.
Legal Topics
Declaration of Title to Land, Counterclaim, Customary Grant, Burden of Proof, Evidence, Possession, Statutory Declaration, Injunction, Damages for Trespass
Source Language
English
Land Law Customary Law Civil Procedure Declaration of Title to Land Counterclaim Customary Grant Burden of Proof Evidence +4 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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Ramsey Adjei Okoe

Plaintiff/appellant

Martin Adjei Sowah

Plaintiff/appellant

Nii Akwetey Lawani

Defendant/respondent

Samuel Adjei Ashong

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs/appellants proved title to the disputed land on the balance of probabilities
  2. 2 Whether the defendants/respondents established a better title or possessory right to the land
  3. 3 Whether the concurrent findings of the lower courts should be disturbed by the Supreme Court

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that both parties' traditional evidence was unreliable, but the defendants established long, undisturbed possession and acts of ownership, which the plaintiffs admitted and failed to rebut. Plaintiffs did not meet the burden of proof for title, and the concurrent findings of the lower courts were supported by the evidence. The appeal was dismissed. The dissent found that the plaintiffs proved a better claim to the land through credible evidence from their grantor family, while the defendants' root of title was inconsistent and unsupported. The dissent would have allowed the appeal, granted the plaintiffs' claims, and awarded damages.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed (majority); lower court judgments affirmed. Dissent would have allowed the appeal and granted plaintiffs' claims.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Judgments of High Court and Court of Appeal affirmed