Nii Mate Tesa and Others Vrs Numo Nortey Adjei Fio and Others [2014] GHASC 167 (15 May 2014)

Nii Mate Tesa and Others Vrs Numo Nortey Adjei Fio and Others [2014] GHASC 167 (15 May 2014)

The Supreme Court held that the concurrent findings of fact by the lower courts regarding ownership of the disputed land were supported by evidence and not tainted by error or miscarriage of justice. The misjoinder of plaintiffs was not fatal and could be cured by amendment. Only the 5th plaintiff had capacity to sue, and the evidence of misjoined plaintiffs was admissible. Estoppel by previous judgments did not apply as the parties and subject matter differed. Both the appeal and cross-appeal failed.

Citation
[2014] GHASC 167
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent/respondent/cross Appellant: Nii Mate Tesa (substituted by Daniel Markwei Marmah); Plaintiff/respondent/respondent/cross Appellant: Nii Matei Tesa (substituted by Marmah Martei); Plaintiff/respondent/respondent/cross Appellant: Nii Tawiah Kwei (substituted by Christopher Anertey Kwei); Plaintiff/respondent/respondent/cross Appellant: Eric A. Kwei (Dr.); Plaintiff/respondent/respondent/cross Appellant: Ataa Kwaku Mensah (substituted by Nii Obaayo); Plaintiff/respondent/respondent/cross Appellant: Fredrick Shamo Kwei (substituted by Samuel Ayiku); Defendant/appellant/respondent: Numo Nortei Adjei Fio (substituted by Nii Adjei Sankuma); Defendant: Empire Builders Limited; Defendant: Odai Ayiku IV (substituted by Afortey Odai IV); Defendant/appellant: Nii Akpor Adjei II (Shikitele, Teshie); Defendant/appellant: Numo Adjei Kwanko II (Ayiku & Osabu Wulomo of Teshie); Defendant: Alfred Anang; Defendant: Moufid El-Das
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
15 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate (supreme Court) Judgment
Outcome
appeal and cross-appeal dismissed; decision of Court of Appeal affirmed
Legal Topics
Capacity to Sue, Estoppel by Judgment, Concurrent Findings of Fact, Misjoinder of Parties, Amendment of Pleadings
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Capacity to Sue Estoppel by Judgment Concurrent Findings of Fact Misjoinder of Parties Amendment of Pleadings

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nii Mate Tesa (substituted by Daniel Markwei Marmah)

Plaintiff/respondent/respondent/cross Appellant

Nii Matei Tesa (substituted by Marmah Martei)

Plaintiff/respondent/respondent/cross Appellant

Nii Tawiah Kwei (substituted by Christopher Anertey Kwei)

Plaintiff/respondent/respondent/cross Appellant

Eric A. Kwei (Dr.)

Plaintiff/respondent/respondent/cross Appellant

Ataa Kwaku Mensah (substituted by Nii Obaayo)

Plaintiff/respondent/respondent/cross Appellant

Fredrick Shamo Kwei (substituted by Samuel Ayiku)

Plaintiff/respondent/respondent/cross Appellant

Numo Nortei Adjei Fio (substituted by Nii Adjei Sankuma)

Defendant/appellant/respondent

Empire Builders Limited

Defendant

Odai Ayiku IV (substituted by Afortey Odai IV)

Defendant

Nii Akpor Adjei II (Shikitele, Teshie)

Defendant/appellant

Numo Adjei Kwanko II (Ayiku & Osabu Wulomo of Teshie)

Defendant/appellant

Alfred Anang

Defendant

Moufid El-Das

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate (supreme Court) Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the concurrent findings of fact by the lower courts regarding ownership of the disputed land should be disturbed
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs (other than the 5th plaintiff) had capacity to sue
  3. 3 Whether misjoinder of plaintiffs was fatal to the action

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the concurrent findings of fact by the lower courts regarding ownership of the disputed land were supported by evidence and not tainted by error or miscarriage of justice. The misjoinder of plaintiffs was not fatal and could be cured by amendment. Only the 5th plaintiff had capacity to sue, and the evidence of misjoined plaintiffs was admissible. Estoppel by previous judgments did not apply as the parties and subject matter differed. Both the appeal and cross-appeal failed.

Court Disposition

appeal and cross-appeal dismissed; decision of Court of Appeal affirmed

Orders

  • Endorsement of the capacity of the plaintiff to the writ is amended to reflect only Ataa Kweku Mensa suing on behalf of himself and other members of the Numo Kofi Anum family
  • Title of the action amended accordingly