High Court Strikes Out Case Against Ghana Law Society Over Lack of Jurisdiction

Court Struck out Plaintiff’s case against Ghana Law Society and 2 Others for want of Jurisdiction. The ruling marks a significant development in a legal challenge concerning the registration and regulatory status of a key professional body in Ghana.

The High Court, General Jurisdiction Division today 31st March 2026 struck out the Plaintiff Yaw Aning Boadu’s Suit against the Ghana Law Society, Registrar of Companies and the General Legal Council for want of Jurisdiction. The decision effectively ends proceedings at the High Court level, with the court determining that it does not have the legal authority to hear the matter based on the governing law.

On the 23rd January 2026, the Plaintiff filed a suit against the Ghana Law Society, General Legal Council and the Registrar of Companies seeking a declaration that the Registration of Ghana Law Society under the Professional Bodies Registration Act, 1973 (NRCD) 143 was unlawful and hence should be expunged among other reliefs. The case raised questions about the legal framework under which professional bodies are registered and the appropriate legal processes for challenging such registrations.

Defendants entered conditional appearance and followed up with Motion to struck out Plaintiff’s suit for lack of Jurisdiction. This procedural step allowed the defendants to challenge the authority of the court to hear the case without addressing the substantive issues raised by the plaintiff. The motion focused specifically on whether the High Court was the proper forum for the dispute.

The Court accordingly Struck out Plaintiff’s Suit based on Section 12(2) of the Professional Bodies Registration Act, 1973 (NRCD) 143 which states that “A person aggrieved by the registration of a Professional Body under this Act may Appeal to the Court of Appeal against the registration within one month after notice of the registration is published in the Gazette by the Registrar.” The court relied on this provision to conclude that the law provides a specific appellate route for such grievances.

The forum therefore for the Plaintiff should have been the Court of Appeal after the Register has Gazetted the Registration and as a result the Jurisdiction of the High Court has not properly been invoked. The ruling underscores the importance of following the correct legal procedures and filing cases in the appropriate courts as stipulated by statute.

Cost was not awarded due to the public interest elements related to the Suit according to the Judge. The court noted that the issues raised carried broader implications for the legal profession and regulatory structures, and therefore declined to impose costs on the plaintiff despite the dismissal of the case.

The decision leaves open the possibility for the plaintiff to pursue the matter at the Court of Appeal, in line with the statutory provisions governing such disputes.