By Issah Olegor
The Supreme Court has decisively ended a protracted and high-profile land dispute involving investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas, delivering a unanimous 7–0 ruling that rejects attempts to overturn a judgment entered in his favour and firmly secures his legal title to a disputed prime parcel of land in Accra.
In a decision delivered on Wednesday, February 11, 2026, a seven-member panel of the apex court dismissed a review application filed by businessman Adolph Tetteh Adjei, who had sought to reverse a Supreme Court judgment delivered in November 2025 by a five-member bench.
That earlier decision had upheld Anas’ ownership claim of the land located at Tse-Addo after years of litigation that travelled through the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
Presided over by Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, the full bench ruled that the application failed to meet the strict legal standards required for the Supreme Court to review its own decisions.
The court held that, after considering the motion, affidavits, statements of case, and oral submissions from both parties, the applicant had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances such as a fundamental error of law or fact, discovery of new compelling evidence, or breach of the rules of natural justice, which are the legal thresholds for invoking the court’s review jurisdiction.
Long legal battle over prime Accra land
The dispute involves Anas Aremeyaw Anas, Adolph Tetteh Adjei, and Holy Quaye, who have been locked in a bitter legal contest over ownership of two acres of prime land Tse Addo, la in Accra. The case originated at the High Court, moved to the Court of Appeal, and eventually reached the Supreme Court, the final court of adjudication.
In November 2025, the Supreme Court delivered a judgment in favour of Anas, affirming his acquisition of the land from the Ataa Tawiah Tsiniatse and Numo Ofoli Kwashie Family, and rejecting competing claims by Tetteh Adjei.
That ruling effectively vested title in the journalist and brought the dispute close to an end.
Attempted reversal and Supreme Court response
Dissatisfied with the outcome, Tetteh Adjei filed a review application, which was heard on January 27, 2026, before a seven-member panel of the court.
His legal team advanced six grounds, arguing that the earlier judgment amounted to a miscarriage of justice, involved misapplication of the law, and warranted reconsideration by the full bench.
However, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the application, holding that the arguments failed to satisfy the minimum legal threshold for a review.
The court stressed that its review jurisdiction is not an avenue for dissatisfied parties to re-argue their case, but is reserved for rare and exceptional situations clearly defined by law.
Legal clarifications and scope of judgment
In reaffirming the November 2025 decision, the Supreme Court clarified several legal issues surrounding the dispute.
The court held that a 2015 consent judgment of the Court of Appeal, which purported to compromise an earlier High Court decision by Justice Ofori-Atta, remains valid and binding unless set aside by a competent court.
This position was maintained in recognition of a pending High Court case challenging the validity of that consent judgment.
The apex court further clarified that its ruling does not invalidate the rights of third parties in respect of other portions of land outside the two acres specifically in dispute.
It held that the grants of third parties remain legally valid unless and until set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction, thereby limiting the scope of the judgment strictly to the subject matter before the court.
