​

Recent developments in civil procedure reflect the courts' dynamic approach to ensuring procedural clarity, judicial efficiency and fairness in litigation processes. These advancements respond to legislative changes and demonstrate the judiciary's role in interpreting and applying existing laws to evolving legal and business environments. These reflections provide insights into these developments and offer stakeholders essential perspectives on navigating emerging procedural trends.

 

Practice directions and administrative guidelines

In April 2024, the Chief Justice, Her Ladyship Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, issued Practice Directions and Administrative Guidelines as part of the LEADing Justice Initiative. LEAD is an acronym for Law, Ethics, Assets, Due Process and Digitalization. This project is aimed at enhancing the efficiency, transparency, and ethical standards of Ghana's judicial system.

 

The Chief Justice issued Practice Directions on the following:

• Commercial Pre-Trial Settlement;

• Prerogative Writs Involving Chiefs and Chieftaincy Issues;

• Award of Costs;

• Plea Bargaining;

• Adjournments and Adoption of Proceedings in Part Heard Trials

• Court Connected ADR; and

• Determination of Applications for Injunctions to restrain Burial of a Deceased Person.

 

The Chief Justice issued Practice Directions on Virtual Court Hearings in 2023 and amended them in 2024 to permit lawyers to participate in virtual hearings even when they were outside the country.[1]

 

The Chief Justice also issued Administrative Guidelines were also issued on the following:

• Directions to aid the expeditious disposals of jury trials;

• Procedures for the online publication of judgments and rulings;

• Courtroom Proceedings;

• Generation of suit numbers; and

• Procedures at the Supreme Court Registry.

 

The Practice Directions and Administrative Guidelines are aimed to streamline civil litigation proceedings, leverage technology to improve access to justice, and enhance the transparency and efficiency of the courts.

 

 

A focus on exceptional circumstances to grant stay of execution of judgments

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Ghana Telecommunications Co Ltd & Another v Atta VI,[2] the law is settled that the courts have jurisdiction to stay the execution of both executable and so-called ‘non-executable’ judgments and orders of a court pending an appeal. However, the applicant must demonstrate that:

 

• the appeal would be rendered nugatory if the relevant judgment or order is not stayed; and

• exceptional circumstances exist to warrant a grant of the application.

 

In Micaiah Addai v Elder Enoch Ofori Junior & 3 Others,[3] the Supreme Court provided a helpful guide on the factors considered in determining the existence of exceptional circumstances. These include whether:

 

1. the Court’s appellate jurisdiction has been properly invoked;

2. the judgment sought to be stayed is either executable or has executable consequences;

3. the appeal raises serious triable issues or is frivolous;

4. the appeal will be rendered nugatory if execution is not stayed;

5. the applicant demonstrated sufficient good faith and a genuine intention to challenge the decision which is the subject of the appeal or the appeal been filed for collateral reasons such as an undue advantage or unjustifiably denying victorious party of the fruits of the judgement;

6. the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss, hardship, damage or injury if the execution of the judgement or order is not stayed; or

7. on the balance of hardship, the applicant will suffer greater hardship than the respondent if the execution of the judgment is not stayed.

 

Although this list is not exhaustive, it is instructive and outlines the key factors considered by the courts in the exercise of their discretionary power to stay execution of judgments or orders.

 

[1] Circular from the Ghana Bar Association dated 12 August 2024

[2] [2017-2020] 1 SCGLR 1090

[3] [Civil Motion J8/29/2023; 16 May 2023]