Wiafe Vrs Bortey and Another [2016] GHASC 92 (1 June 2016)

Wiafe Vrs Bortey and Another [2016] GHASC 92 (1 June 2016)

The plaintiff established a valid claim to the land by obtaining a grant from the Nungua Stool, satisfying the requirements of the Conveyancing Act, and registering his title. The 1st defendant did not have a valid contract of sale or documentation from the Nungua Stool, and her receipt lacked sufficient description to constitute a valid sale. The absence of ministerial consent and registration does not invalidate the plaintiff’s title as between the parties. The appeal is dismissed and the orders of the trial High Court are affirmed.

Citation
[2016] GHASC 92
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent/respondent: Anthony Wiafe; 1st Defendant/appellant/appellant: Dora Borkai Bortey; 2nd Defendant/appellant/appellant: Victoria Amoo
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
1 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court)
Outcome
appeal dismissed; judgment for plaintiff affirmed
Legal Topics
Title to Land, Registration of Land, Customary Grants, Ministerial Consent, Conveyancing, Priority of Registration
Source Language
English
Land Law Customary Law Property Law Title to Land Registration of Land Customary Grants Ministerial Consent Conveyancing +1 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Wiafe

Plaintiff/respondent/respondent

Dora Borkai Bortey

1st Defendant/appellant/appellant

Victoria Amoo

2nd Defendant/appellant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (supreme Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff had a valid title to the disputed land
  2. 2 Whether the 1st defendant acquired valid title through Nii Sango
  3. 3 Effect of lack of registration and ministerial consent on land title

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff established a valid claim to the land by obtaining a grant from the Nungua Stool, satisfying the requirements of the Conveyancing Act, and registering his title. The 1st defendant did not have a valid contract of sale or documentation from the Nungua Stool, and her receipt lacked sufficient description to constitute a valid sale. The absence of ministerial consent and registration does not invalidate the plaintiff’s title as between the parties. The appeal is dismissed and the orders of the trial High Court are affirmed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; judgment for plaintiff affirmed

Orders

  • Declaration of title to the disputed land in favour of the plaintiff
  • Recovery of possession of any portion of the land from the defendants