GORDON LOTSU VS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
2018
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP, JUSTICE GIFTY AGYEI ADDO, HIGH COURT JUDGE.
Areas of Law
- Evidence Law
- Human rights Law
2018
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Plaintiff sought declarations that the Defendant invaded his privacy, violated his fundamental human rights, and caused him distress and trauma. The Plaintiff found a legal document in his bedroom, assumed it was placed there by the Defendant, and claimed it caused him fear and anxiety. The Defendant denied these allegations. The issues for trial focused on whether the Defendant served or placed the motion paper in the Plaintiff's room, and the impact on the Plaintiff's privacy and emotional state. The Plaintiff's evidence was found probable but unproved against the Defendant, leading to the dismissal of the action. Legal principles highlighted included burdens of persuasion and producing evidence. Justice Gifty Agyei Addoh held that the Plaintiff failed to prove the Defendant's involvement and dismissed the claims.
The Plaintiff commenced this action on 29th August, 2016, praying for the following reliefs against the Defendant: a. A declaration that the Defendant by its conduct invaded Plaintiff‟s privacy.
b. A declaration by the court that the invasion of Plaintiff‟s privacy constitutes a violation of his fundamental human right as enshrined in the constitution of Ghana, 1992. c. A declaration of the court that Defendant‟s conduct had caused Plaintiff undue pain, much suffering and distress, trauma and left him in a constant state of fear and anxiety and does not make him safe or at all.
d. An order of the court directed at the Defendant to pay to the Plaintiff Ten Million Ghana Cedis [GH¢10, 000, 000. 00] as minimum compensation for the invasion of his privacy.
e. Costs including lawyer‟s fees.
The gravamen of the Plaintiff‟s action is contained in paragraphs 2 to 15 of the Plaintiff‟s Statement of Claim, a summation of which is as follows: The Plaintiff claims that on 27th April, 2015, he filed a judicial review application in the nature of mandamus in suit number HRCM/268/15 before this Court differently constituted to compel the Attorney General to advise the government of Ghana on the most appropriate way of claiming his financial entitlement from the government of the United Kingdom, which entitlement was consequent upon a judgment in his favour against the government of the United Kingdom.
According to the Plaintiff, he subsequently instituted another judicial review application in the nature of mandamus in suit number HRCM/5/016 against the Defendant on 14th October, 2015, by reason of the Defendant‟s adverse conduct in relation to his grievance against the government of the United Kingdom.
The Plaintiff claims that the two suits were consolidated by this Court on 26th November, 2015. Plaintiff further states that on day the two suits were consolidated, the Defendant, through its attorney, tried to serve him with an original copy of a motion supported by an affidavit filed on 25th November, 2015, with the return date as 2nd December, 2015, in the Court room but he was advised by the presiding judge not to accept it because the judge was going to read his judgment that same day.
This advice, the Plaintiff states, heeded.
The Plaintiff continues that after about three days, he found the said process inside a file that contained a series of documents on top of a wooden cabinet in his bedroom.
That he enquired from the two bailiffs who normally effect