Benjamin Ntow VS Ghana Prison Service & Anor (H1/207/2020) [2022] GHACA 162 (20 October 2022)

Benjamin Ntow VS Ghana Prison Service & Anor (H1/207/2020) [2022] GHACA 162 (20 October 2022)

The Director-General of Prisons is not bound by the recommendations of the Disciplinary Panel and has the authority under NRCD 46 and the Constitution to impose sanctions, including reduction in rank, where deemed appropriate. The Appellant failed to prove that the exercise of discretion was unlawful, arbitrary, or in breach of natural justice. The appeal was therefore dismissed as unmeritorious.

Citation
[2022] GHACA 162
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Benjamin Ntow; 1st Defendant/respondent: Ghana Prison Service; 2nd Defendant/respondent: Attorney General
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
20 October 2022
Case Number
H1/207/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Disciplinary Proceedings, Natural Justice, Exercise of Discretionary Powers, Judicial Review of Administrative Action
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Employment Law Constitutional Law Disciplinary Proceedings Natural Justice Exercise of Discretionary Powers Judicial Review of Administrative Action

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin Ntow

Plaintiff/appellant

Ghana Prison Service

1st Defendant/respondent

Attorney General

2nd Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director-General of Prisons was bound by the recommendation of the Disciplinary Panel
  2. 2 Whether the reduction in rank of the Plaintiff was lawful
  3. 3 Whether the Director-General exercised discretionary powers fairly and in accordance with law

Ratio Decidendi

The Director-General of Prisons is not bound by the recommendations of the Disciplinary Panel and has the authority under NRCD 46 and the Constitution to impose sanctions, including reduction in rank, where deemed appropriate. The Appellant failed to prove that the exercise of discretion was unlawful, arbitrary, or in breach of natural justice. The appeal was therefore dismissed as unmeritorious.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed