By Edwin Khakie
MONROVIA, Liberia, July 22, 2026 – The Supreme Court of Liberia has quashed a petition for a writ of prohibition filed by Oumou Sirleaf Hage and three others in a longstanding estate dispute involving allegations of fraud in title, clearing the way for the lower court to resume proceedings in the matter.
In its Chambers’ ruling delivered on July 20, Assigned Justice Yussif D. Kaba held that the trial judge acted within his legal authority when he set aside a jury verdict and granted a new trial, rejecting claims that the action violated an earlier mandate of the Supreme Court.
The ruling represents a significant legal setback for the petitioners, who had sought to prevent the Civil Law Court from proceeding with the case after the trial judge granted a motion for a new trial following a unanimous jury verdict in their favor.
The Supreme Court ruled that prohibition was not the proper legal remedy under the circumstances and ordered the lower court to immediately resume jurisdiction over the matter in keeping with the law.
The dispute stems from ownership claims over properties linked to the Hage Estate. In 2022, the Supreme Court reversed an earlier ruling of the Monthly and Probate Court and directed that allegations of fraud surrounding the disputed title deeds be referred to the Sixth Judicial Circuit Court for determination by a jury.
Following the trial, the jury returned a unanimous verdict finding respondent Nohad Hage Mensah liable for fraud in title.
However, Nohad Hage subsequently filed a motion for a new trial, arguing that the verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence presented during the proceedings, alleging jury tampering.
The trial court granted the motion, prompting Mrs. Oumou Hage and others represented by Cllr. Arthur Johnson to seek a writ of prohibition before the Supreme Court, contending that the lower court had exceeded its authority by disturbing the jury’s verdict.
Cllr. Johnson had argued that because the Supreme Court had specifically ordered that the issue of fraud be determined by a jury, the trial judge lacked the authority to review or set aside the verdict.
He argued that the jury’s findings should have been certified directly to the Probate Court without further judicial intervention.
But Justice Kaba, writing for the Court, disagreed. The Court held that Section 26.4 of Liberia’s Civil Procedure Law expressly empowers trial judges to set aside jury verdicts and grant new trials where the verdict is contrary to the weight of the evidence or where the interests of justice so require.
The Chambers Justice’s ruling comes at a time another client of Cllr. Johnson, Mr. Samuel D. Tweah, has suffered a similar fate with an allegation of jury tampering as his non-guilty verdict was overturned on Tuesday, July 21.
The ruling emphasized that no distinction exists under Liberian law between jury verdicts rendered pursuant to a Supreme Court mandate and those rendered in ordinary civil proceedings.
According to the Court, trial judges retain their statutory authority to review jury verdicts regardless of how the matter came before them.
“In all civil proceedings, a trial judge presiding over a jury trial has statutory authority to set aside a jury verdict that is contrary to the weight of the evidence,” the ruling stated.
The Supreme Court further rejected arguments that granting the motion for a new trial amounted to contempt or disobedience of its earlier mandate.
Instead, it noted that if parties believe a lower court has improperly interpreted or executed a Supreme Court mandate, the appropriate legal remedy is a Bill of Information and not a petition for prohibition.
Addressing the issue of prohibition, the Court reaffirmed that the extraordinary writ is available only where a judicial officer acts outside his or her jurisdiction, exceeds lawful authority, or proceeds under an improper rule of law. The Court found that none of those conditions existed in the present case.
The decision is expected to further clarify the scope of judicial discretion available to trial judges in jury proceedings and reinforce established legal principles governing motions for new trials in Liberia’s judicial system.
Legal observers say the ruling also underscores the Supreme Court’s position that while juries serve as the triers of fact, their verdicts remain subject to judicial review where authorized by law and where the interests of justice demand such intervention.
With the petition denied and the alternative writ of prohibition quashed, the Clerk of the Supreme Court has been ordered to transmit the Court’s mandate to the lower court to resume proceedings.
The protracted legal battle over the Hage Estate is now expected to continue before the Civil Law Court as the parties prepare for the next phase of the litigation.
