Nana Kwabena Konadu & Anor V. Nana Akyeampong Akwasi II (1954)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

The Boundary, Land, Tribute, and Fishery Disputes (Executive Decisions Validation) Ordinance (Cap. 120), section 3.

Facts

There were two executive decisions fixing the boundary to a Pillar No. 5; the third decision stated that the boundary so far “decided up to the point marked X shall thence run in a direct line to the Abutansu Rock on the Dosija-Aguna Road”: X was admittedly the Pillar AX.18/26/3.

The plaintiff claimed that the boundary was thus demarcated as being a certain line between the two pillars shown on the plan; he won, and the defendants, who had contended that the third decision did not demarcate the boundary between those pillars, appealed; whereupon the plaintiff objected that no appeal lay, relying on section 3 (3) of the Ordinance (Cap. 120).

Held

There was nothing to indicate in the third decision that the line was to commence at the point it was left at by the first two decisions or the direction the line should take on its way to X, and the third decision could therefore not be held as demarcating the boundary between the two points in question; nor was there anything in the record indicating that there was a validated executive decision within the meaning of Chapter 120.

Objection overruled.