Binding effect of Supreme Court decisions in Ghana case law.

We are enjoined by Article 129(3) to treat our prior decisions as binding, and to depart only where compelling reasons make it right so to do. Accordingly, where this Court has previously pronounced on the propriety, validity, or legal effect of the competing Gazettes, we must acknowledge that decision and either apply it or if we are minded to depart, do so with clear and cogent reasons.

THE REPUBLIC VRS. HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) TAMALE EX PARTE: 1. MATHEW NYINDAM DANIEL NSALA WAKPAL 1ST INTERESTED PARTY 2. THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION 3. THE CLERK OF PARLIAMENT [2026] SLR (SC) 22 · Supreme Court · 2026 · KULENDI JSC

For the avoidance of doubt, the setting aside of the judgments of the courts below implies that they are no longer of value as precedents for the purpose of stare decisis. I have, therefore, decided there is no need to comment on any aspects of the legal arguments on the other issues raised in those judgments, even though I may not necessarily agree with them.

PEARSON EDUCATION LIMITED vs. MORGAN ADZEI Suit No. CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/17/2010 [2026] SLR (SC) 32 · Supreme Court · 2011 · DATE-BAH JSC

The binding decisions of the Supreme Court do not matter, whether it is an ordinary bench of five, seven, or nine, except in the case of review, where the Constitution has provided for a minimum number of judges to constitute it.

THE REPUBLIC VRS. THE HIGH COURT (GENERAL JURISDICTION 10) ACCRA EX PARTE: 1. KWABENA ADU BOAHENE 2. ANGELA ADJEI BOATENG [2026] SLR (SC) 6 · Supreme Court · 2026 · ADJEI JSC