![{"remix_data":[],"remix_entry_point":"challenges","source_tags":["local"],"origin":"unknown","total_draw_time":0,"total_draw_actions":0,"layers_used":0,"brushes_used":0,"photos_added":0,"total_editor_actions":{},"tools_used":{"square_fit":1},"is_sticker":false,"edited_since_last_sticker_save":true,"containsFTESticker":false}](https://currentissuesonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/prof.jpg)
Four cardiothoracic surgeons from the National Cardiothoracic Centre (NCC) at the Korle Bu Teaching Hospital and a former secretary have initiated legal action against renowned Ghanaian heart surgeon and former government minister, Kwabena Frimpong-Boateng, and his son, Yaw Frimpong-Boateng, over a long-running property dispute in Accra.
The five plaintiffs — Dr. Kow Entsua-Mensah, Prof. Ernest Adibuer Aniteye, Dr. David Abraham Kotei, Dr. Lawrence Agyeman Sereboe, and former stenographer secretary Mrs. Lucy Agyemang — filed the lawsuit on Thursday, March 12, 2026, through their lawyers, Amenuvor and Associates.
The case centers on residential properties located at Okpoi Gonno along the Spintex Road in Accra, which the plaintiffs say they have lived in and maintained for nearly two decades.
Doctors claim long-term ownership
According to the statement of claim filed in court, the dispute traces back to around the year 2000 when the National Cardiothoracic Centre, then headed by Prof. Frimpong-Boateng, sought to provide accommodation for medical personnel working at the Centre.
The facility acquired parcels of land at Okpoi Gonno and began constructing houses on the site up to the lintel level. Portions of the land were subsequently allocated to some doctors and nurses affiliated with the Centre, who were asked to complete the buildings themselves.
The plaintiffs argue that between 2006 and 2009 they used their own funds to finish the structures and have since occupied the houses as their homes.
They say they have maintained open, uninterrupted, and exclusive possession of the properties for about 17 years, covering all utility bills and other expenses related to the houses.
Dispute triggered by ownership claim
Tensions escalated earlier this year after Prof. Frimpong-Boateng reportedly lodged a complaint at the Rent Control Department in Accra claiming ownership of the properties and describing the occupants as temporary tenants.
In the complaint, he allegedly stated that the doctors and the former secretary were allowed to occupy the houses out of goodwill and that no formal agreement, transfer of ownership, or property documentation was executed in their favour.
The plaintiffs, however, reject that claim and insist no landlord–tenant relationship has ever existed between them and the former minister.
They argue that after allowing them to invest significant personal funds into completing the buildings and occupying them for many years, Prof. Frimpong-Boateng cannot now deny their ownership interests.
Allegations of intimidation
The plaintiffs further claim that the dispute intensified when Prof. Frimpong-Boateng allegedly visited the properties and wrote a message on the buildings stating: “THIS PROPERTY IS SOLD. MOVE OUT BY 16/03/2026.”
They describe the act as harassment and an unlawful attempt to dispossess them of properties they say were legitimately allocated to them by the National Cardiothoracic Centre.
According to them, unless the court intervenes, the defendants may continue actions that interfere with their peaceful occupation of the homes.
Reliefs being sought
In their suit, the doctors and the former secretary are seeking several remedies from the court, including:
A declaration that they are the lawful owners of the properties they occupy at Okpoi Gonno.
A perpetual injunction preventing Prof. Frimpong-Boateng and his son from interfering with their possession and use of the houses.
An order directing the defendants to remove the inscription instructing them to vacate the properties.
General damages for trespass and unlawful interference with their property rights.
Payment of legal costs associated with the case.
The court is expected to determine whether the plaintiffs’ long occupation and investment in completing the buildings confer ownership rights over the properties in dispute.
