Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Ghana decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Republic v High Court, Kumasi and Another (J5/75/2025) [2025] GHASC 48 (23 July 2025)
The High Court, Kumasi, violated the applicant's right to be heard by making an order affecting his statutory rights as Ga Mantse without notice or hearing, rendering its decision and the consequential Court of Appeal decision liable to be quashed by certiorari.
Source excerpt
Torkornoo v S and Others (J8/113/2025) [2025] GHASC 36 (28 May 2025)
The applicant failed to meet the exceptionally high threshold required to injunct the performance of constitutional duties. There was no clear or manifest constitutional violation, nor irreparable harm demonstrated. The allegations regarding the composition of the committee, bias, and the in camera nature of proceedings were either unsubstantiated or matters for determination at the substantive hearing, not at the interlocutory stage. The application was therefore dismissed in its entirety.
Source excerpt
Centre for Citizenship Constitutional … Electoral Systems LBG (CenCES) v Attorney-General and Others (J1/20/2025) [2025] GHASC 34 (21 May 2025)
The majority held that the applicant failed to demonstrate a manifest, clear, and egregious constitutional violation or irreparable harm justifying an interlocutory injunction. The court found that the President's communication, while not detailed, did not on its face invalidate the process, and any alleged procedural irregularities could be addressed through post-facto remedies. The presumption of constitutionality applies, and the balance of convenience favored allowing the constitutional process to proceed.
Source excerpt
Assafuah v S (J1/18/2025) [2025] GHASC 39 (6 May 2025)
The application for interlocutory injunction fails because the factual basis for alleging that the Chief Justice was not notified or given an opportunity to respond before the Council of State's consultation is contradicted by the evidence. The Chief Justice was notified and responded before the prima facie determination. No irreparable harm has been demonstrated, and any constitutional breach can be remedied by declaratory relief if established at trial. The balance of convenience and public interest do not favor halting a constitutional process. Judicial restraint is warranted in interferin…
Source excerpt
Maersk Drillsip IV Singapore Pte Ltd v Commissioner General Ghana Revenue Authority (J4/59/2024) [2025] GHASC 31 (2 April 2025)
The Supreme Court held that the Appellant, as a subcontractor under a ratified petroleum agreement with fiscal stability terms, was not liable for further tax beyond the 5% withholding tax.
Babuboa v Republic and Another (J4/39/2024) [2025] GHASC 22 (12 March 2025)
The Supreme Court set aside the Court of Appeal’s decision, holding it had erred in dismissing a judicial review matter not properly before it.
SOFTTRIBE GHANA LIMITED VRS THE AUDITOR-GENERAL (J4/54/2023) [2025] GHASC 11 (26 February 2025)
The Supreme Court held that the Auditor-General is constitutionally required to give a hearing to any person, including private entities, who will be directly affected by a disallowance or surcharge under Article 187(7). The right to administrative justice under Article 23 and the right to seek redress under Article 33 are not ousted by the statutory appeal process in Article 187(9). The powers of disallowance and surcharge extend to private persons where wrongdoing, negligence, or misconduct is established. Failure to accord a hearing renders the disallowance a nullity and subject to certior…
Source excerpt
KENASHMI GHANA LIMITED VRS. THE COMMISSIONER GENERAL GHANA REVENUE AUTHORITY (CM/RPC/0474/2020) [2025] GHAHC 36 (21 February 2025)
The High Court held for the importer in a customs dispute, finding delay, improper auction procedure, and no proof the four containers were returned.
REPUBLIC VRS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COURT AKROPONGEX-PARTE: SETH , INTERESTED PARTY OTENG (GJ10/12/2025) [2025] GHAHC 62 (6 February 2025)
The Applicant did not utilize the opportunity to be heard before the Rent Officer and did not request the Magistrate to re-open the matter; thus, there was no violation of natural justice and no merit in the application for certiorari.
Source excerpt
Asare v S and Another (GJ/0366/2023) [2025] GHAHC 119 (16 January 2025)
The 2nd Defendant's officers did not act negligently on 17th June 2022 as a 94% database match justified further checks. However, on 18th June 2022, after police had cleared Plaintiff and issued an official extract, the officers acted negligently and unreasonably by preventing Plaintiff from travelling, resulting in loss of employment and violation of constitutional rights. Defendants are vicariously liable for their officers' negligent actions.
Source excerpt
Explore more
