Hayfron-benjamin & Anor Vrs Lands Commission [2022] GHASC 29 (14 December 2022)

Hayfron-benjamin & Anor Vrs Lands Commission [2022] GHASC 29 (14 December 2022)

The appellant, not being a party to the original proceedings and having used the wrong procedure after final judgment, had no locus standi to set aside the judgment or be joined. The absence of a transfer order did not affect jurisdiction, and all procedural requirements were met. No substantive legal right was established by the appellant.

Citation
[2022] GHASC 29
Parties
Applicant/appellant: Jeanette Hayfron-Benjamin; Plaintiff/respondent: Prime Insurance Company Ltd.; Defendant: Lands Commission
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
14 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Joinder of Parties, Default Judgment, Proprietary Estoppel, Jurisdiction, Specific Performance, Right of First Refusal
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Joinder of Parties Default Judgment Proprietary Estoppel Jurisdiction Specific Performance Right of First Refusal

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

Parties

Jeanette Hayfron-Benjamin

Applicant/appellant

Prime Insurance Company Ltd.

Plaintiff/respondent

Lands Commission

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant, as an occupant in possession, was entitled to be joined as a party after judgment had been entered
  2. 2 Whether the absence of a transfer order between judges affected the jurisdiction of the court
  3. 3 Whether the High Court judgment was a nullity due to alleged procedural irregularities

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant, not being a party to the original proceedings and having used the wrong procedure after final judgment, had no locus standi to set aside the judgment or be joined. The absence of a transfer order did not affect jurisdiction, and all procedural requirements were met. No substantive legal right was established by the appellant.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed