AY Kanu & Mary Kanu v BM Kanu & Ors, 1 July 2024

Title and Ownership to Land, Adverse Possession

Case Name: Abraham Yaya Kanu & Mary Kanu v. Bai Moses Kanu & Others
Court: High Court of Sierra Leone (Land and Property Division)
Date: 1 July 2024
Citation: 2024 SLHCLPED 19; CC 96/2012
Judge: The Hon. Justice Dr. Abou B. M. Binneh-Kamara

Keywords: Land Law, Property Law, Adverse Possession, Title Deeds, Summary Judgment

Link to judgment

eBrief Ready, a digital tool designed to help legal professionals create, manage, and share electronic briefs efficiently, is now available free of charge to the legal community in Sierra Leone.

Headnote:

Facts:
The plaintiffs, Abraham Yaya Kanu and Mary Kanu, brought an action against the defendants, Bai Moses Kanu and others, seeking a declaration of title and ownership of a property located at 29 Old Railway Line, Wilberforce, Freetown. The plaintiffs supported their claim with a deed of conveyance from their mother, who had originally acquired the property from the Government of Sierra Leone. The defendants contested the claim, arguing that the property was owned by their deceased father, James Yayah Kanu, and that the plaintiffs’ deed of conveyance was fraudulent. They further claimed adverse possession, asserting that they had occupied the property for 29 years.

Holdings:

1. Title and Ownership:

   • Principle of Law: The court reaffirmed that title to property must be established either through documentary or possessory title. A registered conveyance is evidence of title, but it must be proven that the conveyance is valid and not tainted by fraud.

   • Applied: The court applied the principles from Sorie Tarawallie v. Sorie Koroma and Seymour Wilson v. Musa Abess regarding the need for clear evidence of title and the distinction between mere possession and legal ownership. The plaintiffs successfully traced their title back to a legitimate conveyance from the Government of Sierra Leone, thereby establishing a valid fee simple title.

2. Adverse Possession:

   • Principle of Law: Adverse possession requires the possessor to prove continuous and exclusive possession of the property in question, coupled with the intent to exclude the true owner.

   • Applied and Distinguished: The court applied the principles from Sorie Tarawallie v. Sorie Koroma but distinguished the facts by finding that the defendants' claim of adverse possession was unfounded because the plaintiffs' predecessor-in-title had not abandoned the property, and the defendants were living there with her consent, thereby negating any claim of adverse possession.

3. Summary Judgment:

   • Principle of Law: Summary judgment is appropriate where the defendant’s case discloses no triable issue and where it is clear that the plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

   • Followed: The court followed the principles from Betty Mansaray and Others v. Mary Kamara Williams and Another and Aminata Conteh v. The All Peoples Congress regarding the appropriateness of granting summary judgment. The court concluded that the defendants’ defense did not raise any substantial or triable issues, thus warranting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs.

Disposition:

• A declaration was made that the plaintiffs are the fee simple owners of the property at 29B Old Railway Line, Wilberforce, Freetown.

• The plaintiffs were declared entitled to absolute possession of the property free from all encumbrances.

• An order for the recovery of possession from the defendants was granted.

• A perpetual injunction was issued restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs' use of the property.

• Damages to be assessed.

• Costs of Twenty Thousand Leones (Le 20,000) were imposed on the defendants.

Legislation and Regulations Referred to:

• High Court Rules, 2007 (Constitutional Instrument No. 7 of 2007)

  • Order 16 (Summary Judgment)

  • Order 17 (Disposal of Cases on Points of Law)

• Limitation Act, 1961 (No. 51 of 1961)

  • Section 5(3)

• State Lands Act, 1960 (No. 19 of 1960)

• Courts Act, 1965 (No. 31 of 1965)

• Evidence (Documentary) Act, Cap. 26 of the Laws of Sierra Leone, 1960

• Registration of Instruments Act, Cap. 256 of the Laws of Sierra Leone, 1960

Cases Referred to:

• Sorie Tarawallie v. Sorie Koroma (SC Civ. App. 7/2004) – Applied

• Seymour Wilson v. Musa Abess (SC Civ. App. No. 5/79) – Applied

• Rugiatu Mansary v. Isatu Bangura (Civ. App. 49/2006: Unreported) – Followed

• Cole v. Cummings (No. 2) (1964-66) ALR S/L Series p. 164 – Applied

• Mansaray v. Williams (1968-1969) ALR S/L Series p. 326 – Applied

• John and Macauley v. Stafford and Others (SL Sup. Court Civ. App. 1/75) – Applied

• Roberts v. Bright (1964-1966) ALR S.L 156 – Followed

• Fofanah v. Kamara (1964-66) ALR S.L 413 – Applied

• Swain v. Hallman and Another (2001) All ER p. 91 – Followed

• C.E. Health plc v. Ceram Holding Co. (1988) 1 W.L.R 1219 – Followed

• Home Office v. Overseas Investment Insurance Co. Ltd. (1990) 1 W.L.R. 153-158 – Followed

• Betty Mansaray and Others v. Mary Kamara Williams and Another (Misc App. No. 4 of 2017) [2018) SLCA 1277 (10 June 2018) – Followed

• Aminata Conteh v. The All Peoples Congress (SC. Civ. App. 4/2004) – Followed

Counsel:

• For the Plaintiffs/Applicants: M.P. Fofanah Esq.

• For the Defendants/Respondents: M.Y. Kanu Esq.