His Lordship Justice Paul Uuter Dery Vrs Tiger Eye P.I and Others [2016] GHASC 2 (4 February 2016)

His Lordship Justice Paul Uuter Dery Vrs Tiger Eye P.I and Others [2016] GHASC 2 (4 February 2016)

Publication of a petition for the removal of a judge to unauthorized persons before the conclusion of proceedings violates Article 146(8) of the Constitution, but such violation does not render the petition or subsequent proceedings null and void. The appropriate remedies for breach of confidentiality are declaratory reliefs, contempt, or damages, not annulment. The plaintiff's right to procedural fairness was not violated as he was afforded an opportunity to be heard, and a perpetual injunction against publication is not warranted as confidentiality applies only during the pendency of proceedings.

Citation
[2016] GHASC 2
Parties
Plaintiff: Justice Paul Uuter Dery; 1st Defendant: Tiger Eye P.I.; 2nd Defendant: The Honourable Chief Justice of the Republic of Ghana; 3rd Defendant: The Attorney General
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
4 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Outcome
Declaratory reliefs granted in part; all other reliefs dismissed.
Legal Topics
Impeachment of Judges, Confidentiality of Proceedings, Freedom of Expression, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Judicial Ethics Impeachment of Judges Confidentiality of Proceedings Freedom of Expression Procedural Fairness

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 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Justice Paul Uuter Dery

Plaintiff

Tiger Eye P.I.

1st Defendant

The Honourable Chief Justice of the Republic of Ghana

2nd Defendant

The Attorney General

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether publication of a petition for removal of a judge to the media violates Article 146(8) of the Ghanaian Constitution
  2. 2 Whether such violation renders the petition null and void
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff's right to procedural fairness was violated by the publication

Ratio Decidendi

Publication of a petition for the removal of a judge to unauthorized persons before the conclusion of proceedings violates Article 146(8) of the Constitution, but such violation does not render the petition or subsequent proceedings null and void. The appropriate remedies for breach of confidentiality are declaratory reliefs, contempt, or damages, not annulment. The plaintiff's right to procedural fairness was not violated as he was afforded an opportunity to be heard, and a perpetual injunction against publication is not warranted as confidentiality applies only during the pendency of proceedings.

Court Disposition

Declaratory reliefs granted in part; all other reliefs dismissed.

Orders

  • Reliefs (1), (2), and (3) granted: Declaration that publication of the petition and its contents by the 1st and 2nd defendants was unconstitutional under Article 146(8).
  • Reliefs (4)-(9) dismissed: Petition and proceedings remain valid; no injunctions or nullification granted.