Ebusuapayin Mbrayie Vrs Ebusuapayinkwofie [2022] GHADC 323 (9 November 2022)

Ebusuapayin Mbrayie Vrs Ebusuapayinkwofie [2022] GHADC 323 (9 November 2022)

Plaintiff failed to establish legal capacity to sue in respect of stool land as he is not the occupant of the stool, nor did he show authority from the stool to institute the action. The land in dispute is stool land, and only the chief or, if vacant, the regent or caretaker may sue. Plaintiff's evidence was also inadmissible for failure to comply with statutory requirements. The case is dismissed for lack of capacity.

Citation
[2022] GHADC 323
Parties
Plaintiff: Ebusuapayin Mbrayie; 1st Defendant: Ebusuapayin Kwofie of Akwidaa; 2nd Defendant: Ebusuapayin Oloko aka Isaac Cobbinah
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
9 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Land Dispute / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's case dismissed for lack of capacity.
Legal Topics
Capacity to Sue, Stool Land Ownership, Admissibility of Evidence, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Capacity to Sue Stool Land Ownership Admissibility of Evidence 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 4 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ebusuapayin Mbrayie

Plaintiff

Ebusuapayin Kwofie of Akwidaa

1st Defendant

Ebusuapayin Oloko aka Isaac Cobbinah

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Land Dispute / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has capacity to institute the action against the defendants
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff has established the identity and extent of the land in dispute
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff has established the roots of title to the land in dispute

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff failed to establish legal capacity to sue in respect of stool land as he is not the occupant of the stool, nor did he show authority from the stool to institute the action. The land in dispute is stool land, and only the chief or, if vacant, the regent or caretaker may sue. Plaintiff's evidence was also inadmissible for failure to comply with statutory requirements. The case is dismissed for lack of capacity.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's case dismissed for lack of capacity.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's suit is dismissed.
  • Plaintiff to pay costs of Ghc5000.00 to the defendants with interest from the date of judgment until payment in full.