Kuagbenu Vrs Spencer [2015] GHASC 134 (3 June 2015)

Kuagbenu Vrs Spencer [2015] GHASC 134 (3 June 2015)

The trial judge erred by relying on impressions from an inspection of the locus that did not occur, amounting to reliance on inadmissible evidence. When such evidence is excluded, the remaining credible and independent evidence supports the respondent's claim, and the burden of proof was met. The Court of Appeal was correct to reverse the trial court's decision and grant judgment for the respondent.

Citation
[2015] GHASC 134
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/respondent: Celestine Kuagbenu; Defendant/respondent/appellant: Cecilia Spencer
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
3 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Trespass, Burden of Proof, Admissibility of Evidence, Land Disputes
Source Language
English
Property Law Trespass Burden of Proof Admissibility of Evidence Land Disputes

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Celestine Kuagbenu

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent

Cecilia Spencer

Defendant/respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal erred in reversing the trial High Court's decision
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge relied on inadmissible evidence from an alleged inspection of the locus
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff/respondent proved her case on a balance of probabilities

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred by relying on impressions from an inspection of the locus that did not occur, amounting to reliance on inadmissible evidence. When such evidence is excluded, the remaining credible and independent evidence supports the respondent's claim, and the burden of proof was met. The Court of Appeal was correct to reverse the trial court's decision and grant judgment for the respondent.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Decision of the Court of Appeal dated 23 March 2011 affirmed
  • Plaintiff's claim as endorsed on the writ of summons granted