Mrs. Monica W. Luke v The Minister of Lands, Housing and Country Planning (SC 2/2024) [2025] SLSC 4 (15 December 2025)

S.C.NO 2/2024 aA /) fii ACS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SIERRA LEONE ( -( Ber (eR) IN THE MATTER OF THE INTERPRETATION, APPLICATOIN, anv/of, wio/ ENFORCEMENT OF CONSTITUTION OF SIERRA LEONE, 1991 ACT NO.6— SS” OF 1993, SECTIONS 21, 28, 122, & 124(1)(2 AND, IN THE MATTER OF THE PUBLIC LANDS ACT 1960 (CHAPTER 116 OF ‘THE LAWS OF SIERRA LEONE 1960 AND IN THE MATTER OF AN ACTION PURSUANT TO THE SUPREME COURT RULES 1982 PART XV 2, RULES 89-98 STATUTORY INSTRUMENT No. 1 OF 1982 BETWEEN: MRS. MONICA W. LUKE = PLAINTIFF (AOMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE HON. JUSTICE DESMOND E FASHOLE-LUKE 5 Spur Loop, Freetown SOLON PROPERTY PARTNERS LTO = SOPLAINTIFE No. 6 the Maze Off king Street, Freetown AND THE MINISTER ~ 35° DEFENDANT MINISTRY OF LANDS, HOUSING COUNTRY PLANNING(MLHCP) THE PERMANENT SECRETRARY = DEFENDANT MINISTRY OF LANDS, HOUSING COUNTRY PLANNING(MLHCP) THE DIRECTOR OF SURVEYS AND LANDS - 3 DEFENDANT MINISTRY OF LANDS, HOUSING COUNTRY PLANNING(MLHCP) All of Youyi Building Brookfields, Freetown

Coram

HON. MR, JUSTICE KOMBA KAMANDA Ci(PRESIDING)

HON. MR. JUSTICE M.F. DEEN-TARAWALLY JSC

HON MR. JUSTICE A.S. SESAY JSC

HON. MR. JUSTICE A.M. BANGURAH JSC

HON. MR, JUSTICE M.A. J. STEVENS JA

COUNSEL

AS MARAH ESQ Counsel for the Plaintiffs

R.B. KOWA ESQ Solicitor General for the Defendants:

JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY THE HON. A.M. BANGURAH JSC ON THE irae OF Deeemle, 202

This action was commenced by Originating Notice of Motion(hereafter ONOM), dated the 9th day of April 2024 and filed on the 12th August 2024, seeking to invoke the powers of this Honourable Court conferred on it by Sections 28(1), 122, 124(1) and 127 of the constitution of Sierra Leone 1991, Act No. 6 of 1991(hereafter referred to as “the Constitution"), in enforcement of the Plaintiffs’ protective rights as enshrined in Section 21(1)(a), of the Constitution aforesaid. The prayers and reliefs sought therein could be stated as follows:

‘A. The interpretation of Section 21(1) of the Constitution, in determining the following questions: i) Whether on a true and proper interpretation, construction and effect of Section 21(1) of the Constitution, the freehold fe simple interes inland situate lying and being at Pipeline, Spur Loop, Wilberforce Freetown as bounded in survey plan numbered 1S154/64 attached to conveyance dated the 20th May 1964, registered as No.265/64 at page 123 of Volume 213 of the record books of conveyances, kept in the office of the Administrator and Registrar General Roxy Building Walpole Street Freetown(hereafter referred to as “the land in issue" or “the land in dispute"), can unilaterally and without recourse to the exceptions set out and the due process laid down in Section 21(1) of the Constitution, be expropriated and/or declared State Land by the Defendants herein, whether jointly and/or severally on behalf of the Government of Sierra Leone.

i) Whether on a true and Proper interpretation, construction and effect af Section 21(1) of the Constitution, the action of the defendants jointly or severally, on behalf of the Government of Sierra Leone, in granting leasehold interest of the land in issue held in fee simple by the estate of the 1st Plaintiff's deceased husband and in leasehold by the 2nd Plaintiff’, can legally be construed 45 violation of the Plaintiffs right to protection fcom deprivation of property, guaranteed in Section 21 of the Constitution.

8. Declaratory reliefs based on the answers to one above namely

i). Declaration that the actions of the Defendants jointly or severally on behalf of the Government, in purporting to Cancel, rescind, compulsorily acquire and/or transfer the fee simple interest vested

in the 1st Plaintiff's deceased husband's estate, without recourse to the exceptions and due process laid out in Section 21(1) of the Constitution, is a violation of the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs’ proprietary rights provided for in the said provision of the Constitution.

{i) Declaration that the 1st Plaintiff is the fee simple owner of the property in issue, measuring 7.2372 acres, free from all incumbrances

C. An Order for the recovery of possession of the said land by the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs.

D. Damages to the Plaintiffs for the violation of their rights to protection from deprivation of Property enshrined in Section 21 of the Constitution, from 2019 till delivery of possession.

E, Perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants either by themselves or their proxies privies servants, agents or howsoever called, from entering, remaining upon, leasing, selling, Mortgaging and/or in anyway disposing of or unlawfully dealing with the said land.

F. Further or other relief(s) as this Honourable Court deems fit and just.

G. Costs.

The Application is supported by the Affidavit of the 1st Plaintiff, Mrs Monica W. Luke, deposed to on the 29th day of February 2024, Attached to the said Affidavit are the following exhibits:

Exh. "A" Letters of Administration issuing from the probate division of the High Court to the 1st Plaintiff, dated the 29th June 2021.

Exh. "B" Copy of Conveyance dated 20th May 1964,

Exh. "C" Copy of Lease Agreement dated the 19th December 2012.

Exh. "0" Copy of writ of summons dated the 7th March 2019 and amended on the 11th March

Exh. "€" Copy of interim injunction issued by the High Court dated the 12th March 2019.

Exh.."F" Copy of a Letter dated the 15th March 2019

Exh. "G" Copy of Default Judgement dated the 23rd May 2019,

Exh. "iH" Photos of armed men in military fatigue, on the said land.

Exh. "S" Copy of Letter protesting the deployment of armed personnel on the land in issue, dated the 2nd February 2023.

Exh. "k" Copy of letter dated 27th February 2023 to the Chairman of the Parliamentary oversight committee on lands.

Exh. "L" Copy of letter dated the 28th February 2023, from the Chief of Defence Staff.

Exh. "M" Copy of Letter dated the 19th April 2023 to the Chief of Defence Staff

Exh. "N" Copy of Letter dated the 10th January 2024 from the Chairman of the Parliamentary oversight committee on lands.

Exh. "O" Copy of Lease offer letter to a Richard P G Roberts, dated the 28th April 2023

Exh, "P" photos of alleged ongoing construction on the Land.

The Plaintiffs filed their Statement of case on the 12th April 2024 and the Defendants filed theirs On the 23rd April 2024, after service upon them of the Plaintiffs’ Motion and Statement of case.

Background to This Action

The 2nd Plaintiff by a Lease Agreement dated the 19th December 2012 and registered as No.293/2012 at page 32 of volume 109 of the record books of leases kept in the office of the Administrator and Registrar General, Roxy Building Walpole Street Freetown, is said to be seised of a leasehold interest in property situate at Pipeline Spur Loop Wilberforce Freetown, holding same from the 1st Plaintiff's deceased husband, Desmond Edgar Fashole-Luke(hereafter called "the Intestate’). ‘Sometime in early 2019, the 2nd Plaintiff reported to the intestate that, certain persons had forcibly entered the land and commenced thereon, activities that are inconsistent with his title to the said property. After all efforts to ward these individuals off this property proved futile, the intestate initiated an action against two of the alleged intermeddlers and others unknown, in the High Court, by writ of summons dated the 7th March 2019. On the 12th March 2029, the Intestate as Plaintiff in that action, applied for and obtained an interim injunction, restraining the Defendants in that action, their Agents, servants, privies, proxies or howsoever called, from entering and/or remaining upon the said land, The said Order is exhibited ase" The injunction was accordingly served on the Defendants in the said action, by Counsel representing the Intestate then M.P. Fofanah esq, This notwithstanding, the Defendants continued to interfere with the land in dispute. On the 23rd May 2019, the Intestate applied for and obtained default judgement against the Defendants and which Judgement was served on the said Defendants. Again the Defendants allegedly refused to comply with the Orders of the lower Court. Learned Counsel by letters dated on diverse dates, made several representation to various Authorities, including the Speaker of Parliament, the Chief of Defence Staff, the Chairman Parliamentary Oversight Committee on lands, etc, complaining the conduct of the defendants in the Court below and other unidentified persons and protesting the deployment of armed men clad in military fatigue on the land. The Chief of Defence Staff in one of his letters, denied knowledge of any such deployment. The Chairman of the Parliamentary Oversight Committee on lands, replied by asserting inter alia that, his Committee's investigation revealed that, the land in issue is State land. It was the failure of all of these endeavours by the erstwhile Counsel, that informed the commencement of this action by Counsel now on record AS. Marah esq.

The pages read for this report end here. The judgment continues in the PDF.