Santeng Vrs Acquah & 3 Ors [2020] GHASC 130 (25 November 2020)

Santeng Vrs Acquah & 3 Ors [2020] GHASC 130 (25 November 2020)

The respondent's payment of part of the purchase price and subsequent deposit of the balance constituted part performance, entitling him to specific performance. The appellants' failure to provide a proper indenture and subsequent fraudulent sale to the co-defendant rendered the second sale void. The co-defendant failed to prove he was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice. The appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.

Citation
Santeng Vrs Acquah & 3 Ors [2020] GHASC 130 (25 November 2020)
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent: Edward Kwasi Santeng (Nii Oworshika); 1st Defendant/respondent/appellant: Dr. Edward Acquah per Joyce Acquah (Mrs.); 2nd Defendant/respondent/appellant: Mrs. Joyce Acquah; 3rd Defendant/respondent/appellant: Mercy Oforwaa; Co Defendant/respondent/respondent: S. O. Darko
Court
ghasc
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
25 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court)
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Sale of Land, Fraud, Part Performance, Bona Fide Purchaser, Evidence, Remedies
Source Language
eng
Property Law Contract Law Equity Specific Performance Sale of Land Fraud Part Performance Bona Fide Purchaser +2 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 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Kwasi Santeng (Nii Oworshika)

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent/respondent

Dr. Edward Acquah per Joyce Acquah (Mrs.)

1st Defendant/respondent/appellant

Mrs. Joyce Acquah

2nd Defendant/respondent/appellant

Mercy Oforwaa

3rd Defendant/respondent/appellant

S. O. Darko

Co Defendant/respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was entitled to specific performance of the contract for sale of land
  2. 2 Whether the appellants' sale of the land to a third party was valid
  3. 3 Whether the respondent failed to pay the purchase price within the agreed time

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's payment of part of the purchase price and subsequent deposit of the balance constituted part performance, entitling him to specific performance. The appellants' failure to provide a proper indenture and subsequent fraudulent sale to the co-defendant rendered the second sale void. The co-defendant failed to prove he was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice. The appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Judgment of the Court of Appeal affirmed