Subject Matter Index

Browse cases by legal subject matter and principles

Administration of stool lands revenue

3 subsidiary principles

Consent of principal members of stool land is a requirement to render the grant of stool land valid

Distinction between re-entry of virgin forest stool land and forfeiture of stool land from a subject in occupation

Distinction between stool land and boundary

Effect of abandonment of stool land

Effect of alienation of stool land without the concurrence of the Regional Lands Commission and the Traditional Council

Effect of alienation of stool land without the concurrence of the Secretary of Lands

Effect of the alienation of stool land in the possession of a subject or grantee

Effect of the alienation of stool land without the participation of the chief

Effect of the payment of annual tribute to a stool

Effect of the usufructuary title acquired by a stranger-grantee of stool land

General rules relating to stool lands

How stool lands are dealt with

How stool subjects can be dispossessed of their usufruct in land

Modes by which a stool acquires land

Nature of land occupied by members of a family or quarter

Nature of the possession of stool land by a subject

Nature of the right of a stool-subject in respect of vacant stool land

Position of the individuals, families, etc who occupy land vis-a-vis the stool

Position of the law on the alienation of lands belonging to a paramount stool which is in the care and possession of a sub-stool

Position of the law on the alienation of stool lands

Position of the law on the allocation of stool lands

Position of the law on title to stool lands

Position of the law regarding lands belonging to a paramount stool which is in the care and possession of a sub-stool

Position of the law regarding stool land in Labadi

Requirements for the acquisition of stool lands by the President

The customary law position that where an individual had reduced a portion of the stool or family land into his possession, the stool or family could not dispossess that person without his consent and concurrence

The person entitled to compensation in the event of compulsory acquisition of stool land; the quantum of compensation payable

The proper authority to grant Osu stool lands

The purpose of the practice of the head chief ratifying or confirming a grant by the sub-stool

The rationale behind the the occupant of the Golden Stool confirming the allocations of land made by the Kaasehene

The scope of the right of a stool to deal with stool land

Ways in which stool land may be acquired

What constitutes stool lands

What stool land connotes

Whether a boundary dispute between a divisional stool in one state and a divisional stool in an adjoining state is a boundary dispute between the one state and the other

Whether a caretaker of stool land can make a grant by himself

Whether a chief and his council are entitled to pass a resolution or make bye-laws to deprive the subject of land or property he has acquired in stool land

Whether a chief and his linguist alone can alienate stool property to bind the stool

Whether a conveyance of stool land without the concurrence of the Minister renders such conveyance void

Whether a different title may be carved out of stool lands

Whether a document relating to stool land not executed by the elders or the linguist of stool can bind the stool

Whether a freehold can be created in respect of stool lands

Whether a gift of Osu stool land must be proved to have been made through the Osu Mankralo

Whether a grant of stool land can be granted in respect of land that is not vacant

Whether a grant of stool land without the concurrence of the occupant and the principal councilors of the stool is void

Whether a land is stool land if the occupant has the responsibility for conducting the extra-territorial affairs in relation to the land

Whether a person other than the occupant of a stool can alienate stool land and the effect of such alienation

Whether a piece of land belonging to a head stool must first belong or be attached to a sub-stool or quarter stool

Whether a stool can alienate its absolute title in such a portion of the stool land without reference to the subject or grantee in possession

Whether a stool can alienate land in the possession of a subject without the consent of the subject

Whether a stool can deprive a family, which has been shown to have exercised ownership rights over the land, and continued the exercise of those rights, of their title to the land

Whether a stool can deprive a subject of vacant land immediately adjoining the building of the subject

Whether a stool can grant a portion of stool land to a party where another is in possession

Whether a stool can make a valid grant of any portion of its land on which there exist economic trees

Whether a stool has the right to alienate stool land

Whether a stranger can give out virgin forest land to other strangers for cultivation

Whether a subject can aleinate his possessory title in stool land

Whether a subject can alienate stool land to strangers

Whether a subject can maintain an action for recovery of moneys paid to a stool

Whether a subject in occupation of stool land is liable to pay tolls or tribute

Whether a subject in possession can maintain an action against the stool for dealing with the land in his possession without his consent

Whether a subject in possession of stool land can alienate or lease his possessory title

Whether a subject needs to make a formal application to the stool for the grant of a portion of stool land

Whether a subject of a stool has an inherent right to a fair share of any natural produce of the stool land

Whether a subject of the stool has an inherent right to occupy portion of the stool land not already occupied by another subject or grantee of the stool

Whether a subordinate stool can claim title to land

Whether a valid grant of stool land can be challenged

Whether a void occupation of stool land by a subject is an effective occupation

Whether all unoccupied land within territory under a paramount stool belongs to such stool

Whether an occupant of stool land can claim compensation in respect of stool land

Whether an occupier of stool land, who is a stranger must render customary services

Whether compensation in respect of stool lands compulsorily acquired are to be paid to landowners and/or persons with real or direct interest in the land

Whether compensation payable in respect of stool lands are payable into stool land account to be administered by the Administrator of stool lands

Whether compulsory acquisition of land places an obligation on the government to perform customary services to the Stool

Whether failure to give notice of re-entry in respect of virgin stool land defeats the customary right of the stool to re-enter and re-allocate virgin forest land where there has been a default in its development

Whether hunting confers right of ownership between a stool and a subject

Whether it is only the stool that can grant an interest in stool land

Whether land acquired from a stool acquire the character of private land

Whether moneys arising from the acquisition of stool land constitute a trust fund

Whether occupation and user of land by stool subjects is one of the ways of establishing an allodial title of a stool

Whether or not a land which forms part of a stool land and conveyed to another as a private land can be a subject of compulsory acquisition under E.I 108 which deals with compulsory acquisition of stool lands

Whether or not a subject or grantee of stool land can alienate same without the consent of the stool

Whether stool family land is distinct from stool land

Whether stool land reverts to the stool on the death of the grantee

Whether stool land vested in the President in trust pursuant to the Stool Lands (Accra Plains Vesting) Instrument made on 16th April 1968 continues to be so vested

Whether subject-farmers are bound to pay their quota of a debt incurred by the stool in litigation over land on which they farm

Whether the consent of the elders and councillors is required for statutory alienation of stool lands

Whether the court can make a pronouncement on stool lands boundary where no stool was joined as a party

Whether the Korle priest is competent by himself to make valid absolute grants of Kokomlemle lands

Whether the Lands Commission and the Traditional Council within which the land is situated must consent to the alienation of stool lands

Whether the occupation of stool land by subjects is unlawful

Whether the ownership by a sub-stool of land attached to the stool is a custom of land tenure peculiar to Ashanti

Whether the paramount stool can make a valid grant of quarter land without prior consultation with the head and elders of the quarter concerned

Whether the principle of customary law that a subject of the stool acquires a determinable or usufructuary title in the stool land he occupies applies to virgin forest land on which he expended no labour

Whether the principle that a subject of the stool acquires a determinable or usufructuary title in the stool land he occupies applies to virgin forest land on which he expended no labour

Whether the prohibition on the creation of freeholds over stool lands affects rights accruing before the coming into force of the 1992 Constitution

Whether the same land can be family land and stool land at the same time

Whether the Teshie lands can only be alienated by the Quarters

Whether there can be joint ownership of a land by two stools one of which has been declared dominant and the other subordinate

Whether there is an exception to the rule that any conveyance made by the stool of any land in the occupation of a subject is void

Whether vacant land immediately adjoining the building of a subject is deemed to form part of land on which the building of the subject stands

Access More on judy.legal

Get related cases, follow principles for updates, and access AI-powered research.

Explore judy.legal