Why documents are only part of a land case

A land dispute may involve several documents, competing accounts of ownership and conflicting descriptions of the same site. The three verified decisions discussed below address narrower questions: how visible possession can place a later purchaser on notice of an earlier interest, and why an inspection must be accompanied by meaningful inquiry.

The practical lesson is not that documents are unimportant. It is that a conveyance, certificate or site plan should be checked against the history of the grant, the identity of the land and conditions visible on the ground. A file that answers only one of those questions may leave important factual gaps.

Aryee: possession is part of the inquiry

In Aryee v Shell Ghana Ltd and Another, the Supreme Court of Ghana in 2015, reported as [2015] GHASC 102, considered the significance of physical possession when assessing whether a later purchaser took without notice. The decision supports the proposition that notice is not confined to information appearing in registered instruments: possession by another person may require investigation and may undermine a claim to have purchased in good faith.Judgment

The decision should be applied within its limits. It does not justify disregarding documents or treating every physical activity as conclusive ownership. It shows why documentary title and observable occupation must be considered together when a purchaser’s notice is in issue.

As a matter of practical preparation, a party asserting ownership should organise the transaction history from the claimed source to the present interest. That may involve collecting the instrument of grant, earlier conveyances, allocation papers, payment records, correspondence and plans. Each document should be examined for consistent names, dates, signatures, capacities, boundaries and descriptions.

A claimant should also be able to explain the claimed grantor’s connection to the land. This is practical evidence guidance rather than a statement that every dispute requires the same documents. The relevant materials will depend on the ownership story advanced and the points actually contested.

Nunoo: investigate observable possession

In Mary Laryea Nunoo v Manase Afaglo, the Supreme Court of Ghana decided Civil Appeal No. J4/73/2018 on 28 July 2020. As discussed in the later Court of Appeal decision in Hanson v Salifu, the Supreme Court held that a purchaser who fails to investigate observable possession may be treated as having notice of the possessor’s interest.Source

Identification problems can arise where instruments use different plot numbers, dimensions, landmarks or adjoining owners. A plan may appear clear on paper but still fail to show that the parcel described is the same site occupied or claimed by another party. Conversely, witnesses may use local descriptions that need to be matched carefully to a survey or instrument.

For risk management, parties should compare every available description rather than assuming that similar place names refer to the same parcel. Useful steps may include:

  • placing the relevant instruments and plans side by side;
  • checking names of grantors, grantees and signatories;
  • comparing dimensions, bearings and boundary descriptions;
  • recording existing structures, walls, roads and adjoining occupation;
  • identifying witnesses who observed the grant, occupation or development; and
  • obtaining appropriate surveying assistance where plans appear inconsistent.

These steps do not themselves decide ownership. They help expose whether the competing accounts concern the same land and whether the evidence connects each party to that parcel.

Visible possession and constructive notice

In Mark William Hanson v Lukman Salifu, the Court of Appeal of Ghana in 2023, reported as [2023] GHACA 63, applied the possession-and-notice analysis to structures visible on the land. The court treated a dwarf wall and other structures as circumstances requiring inquiry and held that the registered claimant’s title was subject to the earlier interest associated with the defendant’s possession.Source

That holding gives a concrete warning to purchasers. An inspection should not be treated as a formality. If there is a wall, building, occupant or another visible indication of control, the purchaser should ask who placed it there and what interest is claimed. Photographs, dated inspection notes and communications with occupants may later show what was visible and what inquiries were made.

The three decisions do not establish that possession automatically defeats every document. Their more focused contribution is that visible possession may be legally significant when notice is disputed, while the identity of the land, the parties and the source of the claimed title remain central evidential questions.

Building a reliable evidence file

A useful land file should separate verified material from assumptions. The documentary section may contain grants, conveyances, plans, receipts, correspondence and search results. The site section may contain photographs, inspection notes and a record of walls, buildings or occupants. The witness section should identify who can explain the transaction, boundaries and possession from personal knowledge.

A chronology can reveal inconsistencies that are difficult to see when papers are reviewed separately. It can record the date of each claimed grant, payment, entry onto the land, construction activity, objection and later transaction. Where dates are uncertain, they should be marked as uncertain rather than presented as established facts.

Parties should also preserve the original form of relevant evidence where possible. Images should retain their dates and context, and plans should remain linked to the instruments or instructions under which they were prepared. This is practical advice intended to reduce evidential uncertainty; it is not a substitute for an assessment of the particular dispute.

Practical takeaways

  1. Trace the claimed title. Organise the documents and witnesses that explain how the interest moved from the asserted source to the present claimant.
  2. Identify the exact parcel. Check that plans, dimensions, landmarks and physical occupation point to the same land.
  3. Inspect before purchasing. Visible possession or structures may call for further inquiry.
  4. Record what the inspection shows. Keep dated photographs, notes and communications.
  5. Investigate inconsistencies. Differences in names, dates, boundaries or plot descriptions should be examined before money is committed.
  6. Keep claims evidence-based. Separate what documents prove, what witnesses can personally explain and what remains disputed.

This article provides general information about the identified Ghanaian decisions as at 30 September 2026. This article is for general information and is not legal advice and does not determine any person’s title or rights in a particular parcel.

For assistance from Ohene Gyan & Associates, contact our team.