Omanghana
Actor and filmmaker Joseph Van Vicker has filed a defamation suit against fellow actor Kwadwo Nkansah, popularly known as Lil Win, at the High Court in Accra, seeking GH¢10 million in exemplary damages.
The writ, dated October 10, 2026, concerns statements made in a video published on TikTok and Facebook on August 13, 2026, under the headline, “LIL WIN BANS VAN VICKER FROM ACTING IN KUMASI!”
The dispute arose from disagreements over Van Vicker’s participation in a film project reportedly connected to Lil Win’s production, Journey to Africa. Lil Win accused his colleague of ignoring calls, failing to communicate and withdrawing from film commitments close to scheduled shooting dates.
Van Vicker disputes that account, maintaining that his involvement had not been formally confirmed and that scheduling conflicts prevented him from participating.
In his statement of claim, Van Vicker argues that the remarks damaged his reputation by portraying him as dishonest, disrespectful and unprofessional. He alleges that the publication has made some directors and producers reluctant to engage his services.
The actor further claims that the purported ban from working in Kumasi caused him fear and anxiety, leading him to cancel planned business visits to the city.
Alongside the GH¢10 million in exemplary damages, Van Vicker is seeking general damages for libel and legal costs. He is also asking the court to declare the video defamatory and order a full retraction and a public apology to be published on prominent news portals for four consecutive weeks.
The allegations and claims of harm form part of Van Vicker’s case and remain matters for the court to determine.
The suit follows a separate GH¢5 million defamation action brought against Lil Win by actress Martha Ankomah over another industry dispute.
Veteran Kumawood actor Wayoosi has also commented on the latest controversy, urging Lil Win to exercise greater care in his public remarks and warning about the effect of repeated legal disputes on his reputation.
Van Vicker, who has shared portions of the court documents online, has defended his decision to seek legal redress, stating that “defamation is not freedom of expression.”
Source: Omanghana
