Nicholas Affenyi & 76 Ors -V- Abosso Goldfields Limited (2018)122 G.M.J 1 S.C
16962
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-16962,single-format-standard,bridge-core-2.6.0,qode-page-transition-enabled,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,footer_responsive_adv,qode-theme-ver-24.5,qode-theme-bridge,qode_advanced_footer_responsive_1000,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-6.5.0,vc_responsive
 

Nicholas Affenyi & 76 Ors -V- Abosso Goldfields Limited (2018)122 G.M.J 1 S.C

“A company engaged in mining activities requested the inhabitants of Kyekyewere village and its adjoining area to vacate the village for the purpose of its mining operations. Upon relocation, the structures at Kyekyewere were demolished by the Company.”

Having agreed with the inhabitants on the compensation to be paid on their buildings, the compensation for the disturbance of farming activities at the old village, which was as a result of their relocation, was outstanding.

In view of the above, the inhabitants filed a suit, and the High Court held that they were entitled to compensation. Upon appeal, the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court held that the Company had an obligation under Section 71(1) of the Minerals and Mining Act, 1986 (PNDCL 153), to also compensate the inhabitants in respect of the farms at Kyekyewere. According to the Courts, Section 71(1) as it relates to “land subject to a mineral right”, includes other lands in the area affected by the operations of the holder of a mineral right apart from the land designated in the mineral lease.

Insight: Compensation is not only limited to the land designated in the mineral lease. Compensation may cover other lands in the area that will be affected by the mining operations, even after an initial agreement and compensation have been given.

(*The facts which gave rise to this case occurred during the validity of the Minerals and Mining Act 1986, now amended by the Minerals and Mining Act 2006, with equivalent provisions for compensation at section 73.)