This is governed by the Limitations Decree, 1972 NRCD 54. The idea of limitations of actions is that the state has decided that litigation must be commenced within a certain time after the accrual of the court of action.
Section 10-where the cause of action has accrued in relation to a land matter, the cause of action must be commenced within twelve years of the accrual of the cause of action. If this is not done, the cause of action becomes statute barred.-10(1).
When does the cause of action accrue? The cause of action arises when somebody goes into adverse possession of your land-10(2). The decree does not define adverse possession but says in section 10(4) that the person must make a claim to the land in a manner to become known to the rightful owner. Thus for the adverse possession to be deemed to have arisen, the adverse claimer must do something of which the rightful owner must know. It is from this that time begins to run.
Memuna Moudy v. Antwi-where people unlawfully enter unto state land, thus a land which has been compulsorily acquired by the republic of Ghana, they are not to be deemed to be in adverse possession. The state just give them some implied license to remain on the land until the state needs the land back.
The period of adverse possession must be continuous and you cannot add bits and pieces of periods or times when you are in adverse possession and then come up with twelve years.-section 10(3)
CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH A PERIOD OF ADVERSE POSSESSION MAY BE EXTENDED
DISABILITY –section 16
Where at the time the cause of action accrue , the person in whose favour the cause of action accrue is suffering under disability, then time does not begin to run from when adverse possession first occur but from when the person in whose favour the cause of action has accrued ceases to be under the disability.-16(1).
Under 16(5) disability is where the person is an infant or where the person is of unsound mind. Therefore where adverse possession is made against such persons, you don’t count the time from when the adverse possession starts but from when the disability ceases.
Where the cause of action first accrued to someone who is not under a disability, and then continues to a person who is under a disability, then the disability of the second person will not affect the computation of the period -16(2)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE INTEREST OF THE RIGHTFUL OWNER-section 17
Where after the accrual of the cause of action, the adverse claimant acknowledges the interest of the rightful owner in writing, time shall cease to run.
Sections 17(1)(e) and 17(2).-every acknowledgement must be in writing and signed by its maker..
Section 18(3)-an acknowledgement is binding on the successors in interest of the person who acknowledges the rights of the rightful owner.
FRAUD, FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OR MISTAKE
Section 22-where the adverse possession is based on fraud, fraudulent concealment or mistake, or the adverse possession is a result of fraud, fraudulent concealment or mistake, time does not begin to run from when the person went into adverse possession but from when the fraud, fraudulent concealment or mistake was discovered or should have been discovered by the rightful owner.
THE EFFECT OF LIMITATION
The effect of the cause of action by the rightful owner being statute barred is to extinguish the title of the rightful owner-section 10(6)
In the case of act 2, the rightful owner would be entitled to compensation which does not apply to limitation and estoppel by acquiescence.
Saaka v dahali
long possession per se did not avail the possessor against a claimant, if the claimant was the true owner or could show that he or she derived title from the true owner. On the evidence the interest held by Y and her daughter D in the disputed house were as licensees who had enjoyed undisturbed possession for admittedly many years.
But as licensees under customary law they did not by virtue of their long user per se acquire (subject to the provisions of the Limitation Decree, 1975 (NRCD 54)) an interest in the property which would entitle them to deprive the owner (S) or his successor, the plaintiff, of their ownership.