Quist Vrs Danawi [2015] GHASC 123 (29 July 2015)

Quist Vrs Danawi [2015] GHASC 123 (29 July 2015)

Although the defendant's letter of 24th April 1992 constituted a denial of the landlord's title and made the lease liable to forfeiture, the plaintiff's subsequent acceptance and retention of rent for 10 years, his inaction for almost two years, and his conduct amounted to a waiver of the right to forfeit. Therefore, at the time the suit was instituted, the cause of action no longer existed.

Citation
[2015] GHASC 123
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Charles Lawrence Quist (substituted by Diana Quist); Defendant/appellant: Ahmed Danawi (Afridom Supermarket)
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
29 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed; high court judgment set aside
Legal Topics
Forfeiture of Lease, Denial of Landlord's Title, Waiver of Right to Forfeit, Acceptance of Rent as Waiver
Source Language
English
Land Law Landlord and Tenant Forfeiture of Lease Denial of Landlord's Title Waiver of Right to Forfeit Acceptance of Rent as Waiver

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Lawrence Quist (substituted by Diana Quist)

Plaintiff/respondent

Ahmed Danawi (Afridom Supermarket)

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant denied the landlord's title and thereby incurred forfeiture of the lease
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff waived his right to forfeit the lease by his conduct after the denial
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff had a cause of action at the time of instituting the suit

Ratio Decidendi

Although the defendant's letter of 24th April 1992 constituted a denial of the landlord's title and made the lease liable to forfeiture, the plaintiff's subsequent acceptance and retention of rent for 10 years, his inaction for almost two years, and his conduct amounted to a waiver of the right to forfeit. Therefore, at the time the suit was instituted, the cause of action no longer existed.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; high court judgment set aside

Orders

  • Judgment of the High Court is set aside.
  • Plaintiff's claim for recovery of possession/ejectment is dismissed.