Wiafe Vrs Bortey [2016] GHASC 60 (1 June 2016)

Wiafe Vrs Bortey [2016] GHASC 60 (1 June 2016)

The plaintiff acquired valid title to the land from the Nungua Stool, supported by proper documentation and compliance with the Conveyancing Act. The 1st defendant did not have a valid contract or documentation from the Nungua Stool, and the receipt relied upon was insufficient. Registration and ministerial consent, while important for priority and enforceability, do not invalidate a valid contract of sale. The appeal fails as the plaintiff's title is superior.

Citation
[2016] GHASC 60
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 / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Title to Land, Registration of Land, Customary Grants, Ministerial Consent, Priority of Registration, Conveyancing Requirements
Source Language
English
Land Law Customary Law Property Law Title to Land Registration of Land Customary Grants Ministerial Consent Priority of Registration +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 / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff acquired valid title to the disputed land from the Nungua Stool
  2. 2 Whether the 1st defendant acquired valid title from Nii Sango
  3. 3 Effect of lack of registration and ministerial consent on land transactions

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff acquired valid title to the land from the Nungua Stool, supported by proper documentation and compliance with the Conveyancing Act. The 1st defendant did not have a valid contract or documentation from the Nungua Stool, and the receipt relied upon was insufficient. Registration and ministerial consent, while important for priority and enforceability, do not invalidate a valid contract of sale. The appeal fails as the plaintiff's title is superior.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Orders of the trial High Court affirmed in favour of the plaintiff.