Court order, redevelopment plans - The Fantasy Dome demolition backstory

Read Comments Comments (5)

• GH for sale 1 year ago

  Political criminal witch hunting.

  Political criminal witch hunting.

  reply
• Joy 1 year ago

  So big head nana addo couldn't buy this building on a negotiable way to help Ghana and save the owner part of the money he used to build this structure. Nana addo trust me you are a coconut headed man.

  So big head nana addo couldn't buy this building on a negotiable way to help Ghana and save the owner part of the money he used to build this structure. Nana addo trust me you are a coconut headed man.

  reply
• Attuquaye 1 year ago

  Two corporations are involved in a legal tussle and what has Nana Addo got to do with this? Let the courts decide. Some of you blame the government for everything.

  Two corporations are involved in a legal tussle and what has Nana Addo got to do with this? Let the courts decide. Some of you blame the government for everything.

  reply
• Ex-Pope 1 year ago

  The lease expired in December,2023. The lessor made it clear the lease would not be renewed because of new development plans. The lessee claims he sought a court injunction to allow him time to relocate and that this was gran ...
  read full comment

  The lease expired in December,2023. The lessor made it clear the lease would not be renewed because of new development plans. The lessee claims he sought a court injunction to allow him time to relocate and that this was granted. It should not take more than two months to relocate., given that the lessee was aware well in advance that his lease would not be renewed. It's obvious from the debris scattered in the rubble that for two months since the lease lapsed, the lessee apparently made no plans to move items from the property. In fairness to the lessor, the lessee has not not stated if he had presented the lessor with a time-frame within which to carry out his move. There have been instances where persons had been wrongly evicted or had their properties torn down. In this instance, the lessee may have been using the court system to to unduly delay his move in order to potentially get the lessor to back off from getting him off the premises. If a court order was intended to buy the lessee more time within which to move, the order should clearly have stated the length of time allowed lessee to make the move. Furthermore, it's unclear if the court order had been served on the lessor. Contracts are to respected by both sides. Can't force the hands of a lessor when a lease has expired, especially when the lessee knew when the contract would expire, and very likely was aware that the lease would not be renewed well ahead of the expiration date.

  reply
• Atta 1 year ago

  This is a public land. If there was an injunction from the court to hold on till the determination of the case,then why the demolition under unlawful security protection? My concern is that if the case goes in favour of the v ...
  read full comment

  This is a public land. If there was an injunction from the court to hold on till the determination of the case,then why the demolition under unlawful security protection? My concern is that if the case goes in favour of the victim, then the assailants and not the state shall pay any judgment debt. Ad3n!!!

  reply