A seven-member panel of the Supreme Court has unanimously rejected an application by businessman Adolph Tetteh Adjei seeking to overturn a ruling in favour of investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas in a long-running land dispute.
In a 7-0 decision delivered on Wednesday, February 11, 2026, the apex court held that the application failed to satisfy the strict requirements for a review of a decision earlier handed down by a five-member bench in November 2025.
The court stated that after examining the motion, affidavits filed both in support and in opposition, written submissions from counsel on both sides, and oral arguments presented in court, it found no basis to invoke its review jurisdiction.
The dispute, which also involves Holly Quaye, centres on ownership of a prime parcel of land in Tse Addo, Accra. The matter moved through the High Court and the Court of Appeal before reaching the Supreme Court, which ultimately ruled in favour of Anas in November last year.
Unhappy with that outcome, Mr Tetteh filed for a review. The application was heard on January 27, 2026, by a seven-member panel chaired by Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang.
Under established legal principles, the Supreme Court will only review its own decision in exceptional circumstances, such as a clear and fundamental error of law or fact, the emergence of compelling new evidence that was previously unavailable, or a breach of the rules of natural justice.
Counsel for Mr Tetteh advanced six grounds, arguing that the earlier ruling amounted to a miscarriage of justice and involved a misapplication of the law. The court, however, concluded that the arguments did not meet the minimum threshold required for a review.
The ruling effectively brings finality to the protracted legal battle and confirms title to the disputed two-acre property in favour of Anas, who purchased the land from the Ataa Tawiah Tsiniatse and Numo Ofoli Kwashie Family.
In its judgment, the full bench reaffirmed aspects of the November decision. It emphasised that a 2015 consent judgment of the Court of Appeal, which sought to settle an earlier High Court ruling by Justice Ofori-Atta, remains valid unless set aside by a competent court. Although there is a pending High Court case challenging the validity of that consent judgment, the Supreme Court stressed that it continues to stand until a contrary determination is made.
The court further clarified that its decision, beyond Mr Tetteh and the two acres under dispute, does not affect the rights of other third parties whose land interests remain valid unless otherwise ruled upon by a court of competent jurisdiction.
The panel that heard the review application comprised Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, Justice Richard Adjei Frimpong, Justice Hafisatu Amaleboba, Justice Yoni Kulendi, Justice Bright Mensah, Justice Janapare Bartes-Kodwo, and Justice Ernest Gaewu.
