Martey v Twum (A9/78/2021) [2025] GHADC 201 (2 April 2025)

Martey v Twum (A9/78/2021) [2025] GHADC 201 (2 April 2025)

The Defendant failed to produce a valid, stamped written agreement proving his right to occupy the property for 15 years. The tenancy/lease agreement exhibited was inadmissible for lack of stamping. The Plaintiff's need for the property for personal use was established, and Defendant's alternative accommodation was considered. Defendant's subletting without consent further breached tenancy obligations. Plaintiff is entitled to recovery of possession, subject to valuation and compensation for Defendant's investment, and is awarded costs.

Citation
[2025] GHADC 201
Parties
Plaintiff: Emmanuel Korley Martey; Defendant: Mr. Eric Twum
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
2 April 2025
Case Number
A9/78/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for ejectment allowed; Defendant to vacate premises within 3 months, subject to property valuation and compensation; costs awarded to Plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Ejectment, Tenancy Agreement, Recovery of Possession, Stamp Duty, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Land Law Landlord and Tenant Law Ejectment Tenancy Agreement Recovery of Possession Stamp Duty 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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Emmanuel Korley Martey

Plaintiff

Mr. Eric Twum

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a valid written agreement for Defendant to build and occupy Plaintiff's property for 15 years
  2. 2 Whether Plaintiff is entitled to recovery of possession and ejectment of Defendant
  3. 3 Whether the tenancy/lease agreement is admissible in evidence without stamping

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant failed to produce a valid, stamped written agreement proving his right to occupy the property for 15 years. The tenancy/lease agreement exhibited was inadmissible for lack of stamping. The Plaintiff's need for the property for personal use was established, and Defendant's alternative accommodation was considered. Defendant's subletting without consent further breached tenancy obligations. Plaintiff is entitled to recovery of possession, subject to valuation and compensation for Defendant's investment, and is awarded costs.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for ejectment allowed; Defendant to vacate premises within 3 months, subject to property valuation and compensation; costs awarded to Plaintiff.

Orders

  • Defendant to vacate premises within 3 months subject to property being valued with both parties bearing the cost.
  • Upon determination of property value, current rent rate to be deducted for years Defendant occupied (2012 to date), balance to be paid to Defendant.