OHENE v. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE
1970
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HAYFRON- BENJAMIN J
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Constitutional Law
- Administrative Law
1970
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The court had to decide whether the Principal Secretary of the Ministry of Finance was a proper party to a suit brought against the Republic. The court found that he was not, and substituted the Attorney-General as the defendant.
The plaintiff by his writ of summons claims a declaration that a society operating under section 9 (1) and (2) of the Lotteries and Betting Act, 1960 (Act 31), does not require the permission of the Ministry of Finance to operate a lottery. He claims in the alternative that the withdrawal of the society's licence to operate a lottery under section 9 (1) and (2) of the Act is invalid as being contrary to article 173 of the Constitution 1969. The claims are being made against the Principal Secretary, Ministry of Finance. At the outset a preliminary point of practice and procedure has to be settled, and it is whether or not a principal secretary of a Ministry or more specifically, the Principal Secretary of the Ministry of Finance is a proper party to the suit.
Section 10 (2) of the State Proceedings Act, 1961 (Act 51), provides that: "Civil proceedings against the Republic may be instituted against the Attorney-General, or any officer authorised in that behalf by him, or any officer specified in that behalf under any law for the time being in [p.103] force," Section 12 further provides that:
"All documents required to be served on the Republic for the purpose of or in connection with civil proceedings by or against the Republic shall be delivered at the office of the Attorney-General or to any officer specified in that behalf under any law for the time being in force."
These provisions differ in wording from the relevant provisions of the United Kingdom Crown Proceedings Act, 1947 (10 & 11 Geo. 6, c. 44). That Act provides in section 17 (3) that:
"Civil proceedings against the Crown shall be instituted against the appropriate authorised Government department, or, if none of the authorised Government departments is appropriate or the person instituting the proceedings has any reasonable doubt whether any and if so which of those departments is appropriate, against the Attorney-General."
Subsection (1) of this same section of the Act imposes a duty on the treasury to publish a list specifying the several government departments which are authorised departments for the purpose of the Act.
It is clear therefore that in the United Kingdom civil proceedings against the Crown can only be brought either against an authorised government department or the Attorney-General. The provisions are mandatory. In Ghana, however, Act 51 uses the word "may" which under the Interpretation Act, 1960 (C.A. 4), is not mandatory. This however does not absolve the court from i