Akokorfoto land dispute: Court grants Alpha Beta School possessory rights
The Court of Appeal has affirmed the Land Title of Alpha Beta Education Centres Limited, popularly known as Alpha Beta School, and granted full possessory rights over a parcel of land measuring about 12.85 acres at Akokorfoto South Odokor Estates.
Advertisement
This decision came after a three-member panel of the second highest court set aside a previous High Court decision delivered by Justice Emmanuel Amo-Yartey, deeming it against the weight of evidence in the case which began in 2014.
“I resolve in favour of the plaintiff the omnibus ground of appeal that the judgment of the lower court was against the weight of evidence,” Justice Henry Kwofie, a Justice of the Supreme Court, with additional responsibility as a Court of Appeal judge, stated in the judgment delivered on Tuesday, July 23, 2024.
As part of its consequential orders, the Court of Appeal granted a perpetual injunction in favour of Alpha Beta School against the defendants, their successors-in-title, privies, agents and workmen, preventing them from dealing with the land or doing anything inconsistent with the school’s enjoyment of the land.
The court, which also included Justices Philip Bright Mensah and Janapare Bartels-Kwodwo on its panel, awarded GH¢40,000 against each of the 18 defendants as general damages for trespass. Additionally, the court imposed GH¢100,000 in costs against the defendants in the consolidated suit.
What happened
In 2003, Alpha Beta School agreed with its grantor, Osamanpa Estate Development Limited, for a sublease over the parcel of land covering a 90-year period. Osamanpa Estate Development Limited acquired the land from the Gbawe Stool.
Following this, Alpha Beta School registered the land and was granted a land title certificate in 2012. The school then proceeded to the Accra Metropolitan Assembly to rezone and obtain a permit to commence its educational project.
However, in 2014, the defendants trespassed on the land, prompting the school to sue the defendants in an attempt to reclaim the land.
Other Trending Stories
In two separate suits filed at the High Court, Alpha Beta School sought to stop the defendants from constructing on the land, a declaration of title in its name and an order granting it recovery of possession.
Defence
In their defence, the Sempe Stool, represented by the Head of Kpakpo Barima We, Nii Adotei Korle-bu ll (substituted by Nii Adote Otintor ll, aka Nii Moi Brown) with other defendants, claimed that the parcel of land in dispute belonged to the Sempe Stool.
To support their claim, the defendants relied on a lease the Sempe Stool gave to the Agricultural Development Corporation (ADC) in 1990. Counsel for the defendants also cited Justice Charles Sterling Acolatse’s judgment in 1963 and a Supreme Court decision in 1990, which they claimed granted them exclusive possession based on the lease.
Opposition
Alpha Beta School opposed these claims, arguing that the 1963 judgment did not affect the Akokorfoto lands. The school also relied on a 2006 judgment by Justice Victor Ofoe, which ruled in favour of the Gbawe Stool against the Sempe Stool on the grounds that the Sempe Stool could not prove its claim of ownership.
At the end of the trial at the High Court, Justice Amo-Yartey declared that Alpha Beta School could claim title over the land since they were able to prove it in court. However, the trial judge refused to grant the school possessory rights, concluding that the 1990 Supreme Court decision gave exclusive possession to the Sempe Stool, which could not be overturned.
Appeal
Unsatisfied with the judgment, both parties filed separate appeals challenging the High Court ruling. While Alpha Beta School argued that the judge erred in holding that the 1963 judgment granted possession to the Sempe Stool, the defendants contended that the judge erred by granting title to Alpha Beta School while maintaining that the 1963 judgment gave possession to the Sempe Stool.
The defendants further argued that the 1963 judgment granted possession to the Sempe Stool, preceding the title, and that the judge erred by not departing from Justice Ofoe’s judgment.
Judgment
After the trial, the Court of Appeal set aside the High Court’s findings, describing them as erroneous. According to the Court of Appeal, one of the erroneous findings was declaring that the plaintiff was not entitled to possession when evidence showed that Sempe’s claim of possession was dismissed in the 1963 judgment.
“The lower court has also erroneously held that the Supreme Court has affirmed possessory rights of the land in the Sempe Stool when that holding was unsupportable,” Justice Kwofie said.
Writer’s email: justice.agbenorsi@graphic.com.gh
