lut
The appellant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the respondent trespassed into his land. The evidence established the boundary as cassava trees, not the respondent's house base. The tribunal properly admitted and read Exhibit Pl. The tribunal erred in declaring the respondent lawful owner absent a counterclaim, but this did not affect the outcome as dismissal of the application meant the disputed land remains with the respondent.
Source excerpt
- Land boundary disputes
- Trespass
- Burden of proof
- Pleadings and reliefs