A seven-member panel of the Supreme Court has unanimously rejected an application by businessman Adolph Tetteh Adjei seeking a review of an earlier ruling in favour of investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas in a long-running land dispute.
In a 7–0 decision, the apex court held that the application failed to meet the required threshold for reviewing a judgment delivered in November 2025 by a five-member panel of the court.
The justices stated that after examining the motion, supporting and opposing affidavits, written submissions, and oral arguments from counsel on both sides, they found no sufficient grounds to justify invoking the court’s review jurisdiction.
The dispute, involving Mr Tetteh, Anas, and Holly Quaye, centres on ownership of a prime parcel of land in Accra. The case progressed from the High Court to the Court of Appeal and ultimately to the Supreme Court, which ruled in November last year in favour of Anas.
Unhappy with that outcome, Mr Tetteh filed a review application, which was heard on January 27, 2026, by the seven-member panel chaired by Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang.
Under Ghanaian law, the Supreme Court may only review its own decisions under exceptional circumstances — such as a clear error of law or fact on the face of the record, the emergence of new and compelling evidence previously unavailable, or a violation of the rules of natural justice.
Counsel for Mr Tetteh presented six grounds, arguing that the earlier decision resulted in a miscarriage of justice and involved a misapplication of the law. However, in its ruling delivered on Wednesday, February 11, 2026, the court concluded that the applicant had not satisfied the strict conditions necessary for a review.
The decision effectively brings closure to the protracted legal battle and affirms title to the disputed two-acre property in favour of Anas, who acquired the land from the Ataa Tawiah Tsiniatse and Numo Ofoli Kwashie family.
The full bench also reaffirmed aspects of its earlier judgment. It noted that a 2015 consent judgment by 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 a separate case challenging the validity of that consent judgment is pending before the High Court, the Supreme Court stressed that it remains in force until determined otherwise.
Additionally, the court clarified that its ruling concerning Mr Tetteh and the disputed two-acre parcel does not affect the rights of third parties whose interests remain valid unless ruled upon by a court of competent jurisdiction.
Other members of the review panel included Justices Richard Adjei Frimpong, Hafisatu Amaleboba, Yoni Kulendi, Bright Mensah, Janapare Bartels-Kodwo, and Ernest Gaewu.
