The Land Division of the Accra High Court has ordered retired Chief of Air Staff, Air Vice Marshal Frank Hanson, and some serving officers not to set foot on a piece of land at Tse Addo.
In a judgment dated February 26, 2026, the court, presided over by Justice Abena Oppong, a Justice of the Court of Appeal, sitting as an additional High Court judge, perpetually restrained the former Chief of Air Staff and the serving officers from the land.
That was after the court held that the former Chief of Air Staff, who is the defendant in the land case, did not give any evidence to support his allegation that the plaintiff’s grantors lacked capacity to grant the disputed land to the plaintiff.
“It is clear from the evidence that the defendant interfered with the disputed land.
He has since failed to justify his intentions on the plaintiff’s land,” the judge held.
The court awarded GH¢10,000 against Air Vice Marshall Hanson (rtd), the defendant, as damages for using serving soldiers to trespass the land and harassing the plaintiff, even after the judgment.
The court in its decision also ordered the defendant to remove his container, containing offensive materials from the land after declaring the plaintiff, Adolf Tetteh Adjei, as the rightful owner of the parcel of land and granting the plaintiff possession.
Background
The Managing Director of Sapholda Ventures Limited, Adolf Tetteh Adjei, sued Air Vice Marshal Hanson (rtd) and Wing Commander John William Quainoo (rtd) separately for trespassing on his piece of land.
As part of his reliefs, Mr Adjei wanted the court to direct the retired Chief of Air Staff to remove his container with offensive materials, from the plaintiff’s land and level same at defendant’s expense.
Discover more
News app subscription
Health and wellness products
Mobile News Alerts
He also wanted a perpetual injunction restraining retired “Air Vice Marshal Hanson, his servants, agents, workmen or any person claiming through him whosoever described from entering and or having any dealings with Plaintiff’s land in any way”.
General damages
He was also asking for general damages for trespassing and recovery of possession as well as costs including lawyer’s fee of 10 per centum of the value of the disputed land and any other reliefs or orders.
The size of the land in contention is 2.40 acres.
