GAABS LTD vs. BOAKYE [1991]DLCA2234

Date	1991-04-25
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1991]DLCA2234

LAMPTEY JA

OFORI-BOATENG JA

ADJABENG JJA

ALEX QUAINOR FOR THE APPELLANT.

MRS WILLIAMS FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1991]DLCA2234
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" >GAABS
LTD<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>BOAKYE<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF
APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1991] 1
GLR 533<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="right" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:right;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">Date: 25 APRIL 1991<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>ALEX
QUAINOR FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

MRS
WILLIAMS FOR THE RESPONDENTS. <o:p></o:p>

LAMPTEY,
OFORI-BOATENG AND ADJABENG JJA<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT
OF BOATENG JA.<o:p></o:p>This is
an appeal against the judgment of the High Court, Koforidua. In 1960, the
Government of Ghana passed the Stool Lands Act, 1960 (Act 27); section 1 (1) of
which provides:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“1. (1)
Where it appears to the President that it is in the public interest so to do he
may by executive instrument declare any stool land which is subject to the
provisions of the Stool Lands Acts to be vested in him and accordingly it shall
be lawful for the President, on the publication of the instrument, to execute
any deed or do any act as a trustee in respect of the stool land specified in
the instrument.”<o:p></o:p>In
accordance with this section the Stool Lands Instrument, 1961 (EI 195 of 1961),
was passed; it states:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“In
exercise of the powers conferred on the President by section 1 of the Stool
Lands Act, 1960 (Act 27) the following Instrument is made this 1st day of
November, 1961. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">The stool
lands specified in the Schedule hereto which are subject to the Stool Lands
Acts are hereby declared to be vested in the President. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">SCHEDULE <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">All stool
lands within the boundaries of the towns of Koforidua and Nkawkaw.”<o:p></o:p>The legal
effect of EI 195 of 1961 is that on the day it was made on 1 November 1961, the
President became vested with the duties and the rights of a trustee to these
stool lands. By the Administration of Lands Act, 1962 (Act 123), Act 27 was
repealed; but the repeal could not affect any acts done or rights already
vested or accrued under Act 27: see section 8(c) of the Interpretation Act,
1960 (CA 4). For purposes of determining this case, the proper law will have to
be essentially the repealed Act 27 and EI 195 of 1961 unaffected by the more
refined Act 123, particularly its section 10.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff’s case is that many years ago his uncle, the Krontihene of Koforidua,
by virtue of being the prime cultivator of the virgin forest became the owner
of it, and it had through inheritance become family property. He inherited
fruiting cocoa trees and palm trees and other food crops, and that he had all
the time been in active and effective possession. This evidence was not
challenged by the defendant-company.<o:p></o:p>The
defendant-company’s case was that about 1973 they applied for land to the Lands
Department. In 1978 a part of a piece of land previously granted to the State
Housing Corporation was granted to them by the Lands Department and this
portion happened to include a part of the plaintiff’s land.<o:p></o:p>The Lands
Department claims its source of ownership from Act 27 and EI 195 of 1961 that
had vested in the President as a trustee, all stool lands within the town
boundaries of Koforidua and Nkawkaw. The Lands Department was thus an organ for
exercising the rights and duties of the President’s stewardship as a trustee.<o:p></o:p>If this
case had been decided under Act 123, EI 195 of 1961 would have been invalidated
under section 10(2) of that Act, but I find it difficult to fault EI 195 of
1961 for its lack of details, because Act 27 on which it is based is itself
lax. I accordingly, hold that imprecise as the schedule is, it identifies
sufficiently the lands affected, with effect from 1 November, as the “Stool
Lands within the town boundaries of Koforidua,” provided what constitutes stool
land is clear.<o:p></o:p>