The Republic Vrs Hc Ex Parte; Opuni [2023] GHASC 50 (24 January 2023)

The Republic Vrs Hc Ex Parte; Opuni [2023] GHASC 50 (24 January 2023)

The trial judge, Honyenuga JSC, acted within jurisdiction as he was properly granted a six-month extension by the Chief Justice under Article 145(4) to continue proceedings commenced before him prior to attaining retirement age. The Chief Justice, not the President, is the proper authority for such extension. There was no breach of binding precedent or natural justice, and the application for certiorari and perpetual injunction was without merit.

Citation
[2023] GHASC 50
Parties
Applicant: Stephen Kwabena Opuni; 1st Respondent and 1st Interested Party: Attorney-General; 2nd Interested Party: Seidu Agongo; 3rd Interested Party: Agricult Ghana Ltd.
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
24 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Motion (certiorari and Perpetual Injunction) / Ruling on Application for Certiorari and Perpetual Injunction
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Certiorari, Perpetual Injunction, Judicial Tenure, Jurisdiction, Natural Justice, Bias, Interpretation of Constitution
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Judicial Review Criminal Procedure Certiorari Perpetual Injunction Judicial Tenure Jurisdiction Natural Justice +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Kwabena Opuni

Applicant

Attorney-General

1st Respondent and 1st Interested Party

Seidu Agongo

2nd Interested Party

Agricult Ghana Ltd.

3rd Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Motion (certiorari and Perpetual Injunction) / Ruling on Application for Certiorari and Perpetual Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge acted without jurisdiction after attaining retirement age under Article 145(2)(a) of the Constitution 1992
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge breached Article 129(3) by not following binding Supreme Court decisions
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in interpreting Articles 139(1)(c) and 145(4) regarding extension of tenure

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge, Honyenuga JSC, acted within jurisdiction as he was properly granted a six-month extension by the Chief Justice under Article 145(4) to continue proceedings commenced before him prior to attaining retirement age. The Chief Justice, not the President, is the proper authority for such extension. There was no breach of binding precedent or natural justice, and the application for certiorari and perpetual injunction was without merit.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for certiorari to quash the High Court ruling is dismissed
  • Application for perpetual injunction restraining the trial judge is dismissed