The Management Committee of La Pleasure Beach has sued Hotel Investments (Ghana) Limited, operator of Labadi Beach Hotel, La Palm Beach Hotel Limited and the Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT) over the demolition of its management office and other structures at the beachfront on October 2, 2026.
The committee is seeking declarations that it has the exclusive mandate to manage, control, regulate and license activities at La Pleasure Beach, alongside compensation for the destruction of its properties and losses allegedly suffered during the exercise.
In a statement of claim filed at the High Court in Accra on October 23, 2026, Stanley Anyetei Nunoo, chairman of the committee, alleges that the three defendants jointly participated in, facilitated and benefited from the demolition.
The plaintiff argues that the exercise was carried out without a court order, warrant, prior notice or hearing, resulting in the destruction of the committee’s office, licensed structures, equipment, furniture, files and other records.
According to the statement of claim, the committee was established pursuant to a Court of Appeal order dated July 21, 2022, following the dissolution of an interim management committee established by the High Court in April 2013.
The committee comprises representatives of the La Dadekotopon Youth Association, La Traditional Council and the Ghana Tourist Development Company Limited.
Nunoo contends that the committee has managed the beachfront, licensed operators, regulated activities and generated revenue without challenge from the defendants.
The suit argues that although Labadi Beach Hotel and La Palm Beach Hotel adjoin the beachfront, their operators have no ownership or possessory rights over La Pleasure Beach or its management, except for any access licence granted by the committee.
Dispute over demolition
The committee alleges that security personnel from the Ghana Police Service and the Ghana Armed Forces raided the beachfront at dawn on October 2 and demolished its management office and other structures.
It further claims that equipment, furniture, files and records were destroyed, while staff and licensed operators were chased away.
The plaintiff maintains that no court order authorised the demolition and that the committee was not given an opportunity to be heard before its properties were destroyed.
It accuses the defendants of acting together to remove the committee from the management of the beachfront and prevent it from carrying out the responsibilities assigned to it under the Court of Appeal order.
The statement of claim further alleges that the demolition was intended to enable the defendants, their owners and affiliates to take control of the beachfront and permanently exclude the committee and its licensees.
SSNIT’s position
The suit also refers to a media release issued by SSNIT on October 2, 2026, in which the trust said it had sought the urgent intervention of the National Security Council Secretariat over what it described as persistent unlawful occupation, encroachment and unauthorised activities on the beachfront adjoining Labadi Beach Hotel and La Palm Royal Beach Hotel.
According to the statement of claim, SSNIT explained that the two hotels formed part of its investment portfolio and that it had a fiduciary responsibility to protect their value and ensure sustainable returns for contributors and pensioners.
The committee contends that the release was issued on behalf of SSNIT’s Board of Trustees, which it identifies as the ultimate owner of the two hotel companies.
The plaintiff also cites a public statement by Stan Xoese Dogbe, Deputy Chief of Staff in charge of operations at the Flagstaff House, which it says confirmed that the demolition was supervised by National Security at SSNIT’s request.
The suit further alleges that Hotel Investments had previously instituted a separate action at the High Court’s Land Division in Accra against Spartan Ives Limited, operators of Polo Beach Club, over a claim to 0.70 acres of land and the beachfront adjoining Labadi Beach Hotel.
It states that Hotel Investments discontinued that case, numbered LD/0515/2024, shortly before the demolition.
The committee argues that the discontinuance, followed by the demolition, amounted to abandoning the judicial process in favour of self-help.
The allegations are contained in the plaintiff’s statement of claim and have not been established by the court.
Reliefs sought
The committee is asking the High Court to declare that it has the exclusive mandate to manage, control, regulate and license activities at La Pleasure Beach and generate revenue from its operations.
It also wants the court to declare that the defendants acted unlawfully in demolishing its properties and interfering with its operations on October 2.
The plaintiff is seeking a perpetual injunction to restrain the defendants, their agents, successors and anyone claiming through them from entering, occupying, managing, controlling or otherwise interfering with the beachfront and the committee’s possession of it.
Additionally, it wants an order directing the defendants to restore possession and management of the beach to the committee and return any properties removed during the demolition.
The suit seeks an independent valuation and inquiry into the properties allegedly damaged, destroyed or removed, as well as the committee’s claimed losses in business, revenue, licence fees and management income.
The committee is also claiming special damages based on an independent valuation, general damages for alleged trespass, unlawful destruction and interference with business, aggravated and exemplary damages, interest and legal costs.
It has asked the court to grant any further reliefs it considers appropriate.
