[1970]DLSC11217 • April 17, 1970 • Supreme Court •
ATTORNEY–GENERAL vs. SALLAH
The respondent, formerly a manager at G.N.T.C., was notified by the Presidential Commission under the 1969 Constitution that his services were no longer required pursuant to section 91. He challenged this termination, seeking a declaration that his office was outside the scope of section 91 and that the government's termination was wrongful. The Attorney-General represented the government. During the hearing, the Attorney-General filed a motion to disqualify two judges (Apaloo and Sowah JJ.A.) on grounds of alleged close personal friendship and potential bias towards the respondent.
read moreRULING On 21 February 1970 certain office-holders received notification from the Presidential Commission, acting in pursuance of the Constitution, 1969, Sched. I, s.9 (1), that their services were no longer required. The respondent, formerly a manager of the G.N.T.C., was one such office-holder affected by the said section 9(1). He brought an action before the Supreme Court for a declaration that on a proper interpretation of section 9(1) his office fell outside the purview of the offices contemplated by the section and therefore the Government was wrong in terminating his employment. The Attorney-General, as the legal representative of the Government, was made the defendant to the action. It was heard by a bench composed of Apaloo, Siriboe, Sowah, Anin and Archer JJ.A. on 16, 17 and 18 March. The court then adjourned to advise itself of its judgment [see 1970 C.C.48, SC.]. On 24 March the Attorney-General filed the instant motion of notice asking that Apaloo and Sowah JJ.A. be ...