Boakye and Another Vrs Asiedu [2021] GHASC 102 (15 December 2021)

Boakye and Another Vrs Asiedu [2021] GHASC 102 (15 December 2021)

The Supreme Court found that the evidence, particularly the authentic receipt, established that Kingsley Boakye purchased the land and built the house with his wife, making it their personal property. The plaintiff failed to discharge the burden of proof that the land was acquired by his mother or that the property was family property. The inconsistencies in the plaintiff's witness's testimony undermined his case. The Court restored the High Court's decision, granting all counterclaims to the defendants and ordering the plaintiff to yield possession.

Citation
[2021] GHASC 102
Parties
Defendant/appellant: Mrs Theresa Boakye; Defendant/appellant: Frank Asiedu Boakye; Defendant/appellant: Napoleon Twum Barimah; Plaintiff/respondent: Opanin Kwame Asiedu
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
15 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment restored; all counterclaims granted to defendants.
Legal Topics
Ownership of Land, Family Property, Burden of Proof, Documentary Evidence, Capacity to Sue, Joint Ownership, Customary Succession
Source Language
English
Land Law Succession Law Customary Law Evidence Ownership of Land Family Property Burden of Proof Documentary Evidence +3 more

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 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Theresa Boakye

Defendant/appellant

Frank Asiedu Boakye

Defendant/appellant

Napoleon Twum Barimah

Defendant/appellant

Opanin Kwame Asiedu

Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who acquired and owns the disputed land and house?
  2. 2 Whether the property is family property or the personal property of Kingsley Boakye and/or his wife?
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff had capacity to sue on behalf of the alleged family?

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court found that the evidence, particularly the authentic receipt, established that Kingsley Boakye purchased the land and built the house with his wife, making it their personal property. The plaintiff failed to discharge the burden of proof that the land was acquired by his mother or that the property was family property. The inconsistencies in the plaintiff's witness's testimony undermined his case. The Court restored the High Court's decision, granting all counterclaims to the defendants and ordering the plaintiff to yield possession.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment restored; all counterclaims granted to defendants.

Orders

  • Plaintiff to yield up vacant possession of House Number J2 to 1st defendant.
  • Declaration that the property is the bona fide property of the late Kingsley Kwadwo Boakye.