Thomas Nash Boamah Vrs Frederick Adorke & 5 Ors. [2022] GHACC 92 (14 December 2022)

Thomas Nash Boamah Vrs Frederick Adorke & 5 Ors. [2022] GHACC 92 (14 December 2022)

The applicant has demonstrated an interest in the disputed property, there are serious questions of law and fact to be tried, and the balance of convenience requires maintaining the status quo to protect the applicant’s interest pending final determination of the suit.

Citation
[2022] GHACC 92
Parties
Plaintiff/applicant: Thomas Nash Boamah; Defendant/respondent: Frederic Adorke; Defendant/respondent: Yaw Kwachir; Defendant/respondent: Sheila Ohenewaa; Defendant/respondent: Loretta Agyeiwaa; Defendant/respondent: Selina Achbod Orlando; Defendant/respondent: Mohammed Dautey
Court
Circuit Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
14 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Injunction
Outcome
interlocutory injunction granted
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunction, Ownership Dispute, Trespass, Matrimonial Property
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Interlocutory Injunction Ownership Dispute Trespass Matrimonial Property

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Nash Boamah

Plaintiff/applicant

Frederic Adorke

Defendant/respondent

Yaw Kwachir

Defendant/respondent

Sheila Ohenewaa

Defendant/respondent

Loretta Agyeiwaa

Defendant/respondent

Selina Achbod Orlando

Defendant/respondent

Mohammed Dautey

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an interlocutory injunction restraining the respondents from dealing with the disputed land pending final determination of the suit
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated a legal right or interest in the property in dispute
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favors granting the injunction

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant has demonstrated an interest in the disputed property, there are serious questions of law and fact to be tried, and the balance of convenience requires maintaining the status quo to protect the applicant’s interest pending final determination of the suit.

Court Disposition

interlocutory injunction granted

Orders

  • Respondents, their agents, workmen, privies, assigns, and any person claiming through them are restrained from dealing with the property in dispute pending final determination of the suit.
  • The 5th respondent shall maintain the status quo and is restrained from further developing the property until final determination of the suit.