Lawyers Cannot Stop Cases Over Legal Vacation – Chief Justice

By Maame Efua Kwaduah

Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie has strongly rejected concerns raised by the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) that lawyers should not be required to proceed with cases during the legal vacation.

The Chief Justice defended the authority of judges to continue hearing cases during the legal vacation, insisting that lawyers cannot unilaterally decide not to appear in court simply because a trial has been scheduled within the vacation period.

Speaking at the Second Quadrennial Delegates Congress of the Senior Staff Association of the Judicial Service of Ghana in Sunyani on August 10, the Chief Justice explained that a lawyer who has made personal arrangements during the legal vacation cannot use those arrangements as grounds to prevent a judge who is sitting from hearing a case.

He emphasised that lawyers who wish to take leave may do so only if their clients permit them to do so.

“To write to the Chief Justice to say that the cases should not be adjourned to the vacation, so I am not coming, I have already made arrangements outside, so I am not coming.

“You are a lawyer, you have your clients. If your clients decide to give you leave, well, go on leave, but you cannot say that there is a legal vacation and the judge who is actually sitting cannot do your case. No, that is not it,” he stated.

The Chief Justice also stressed that decisions on adjournments are judicial decisions and do not rest with the Chief Justice.

“No, adjournments are not at the instance of the Chief Justice. Adjournment is a judicial act. This is something that is so basic,” he stated.

His comments follow a letter from the Ghana Bar Association appealing to the Chief Justice over concerns about lawyers being required to appear in court during the legal vacation.

In the letter dated August 10, 2026, the GBA argued that lawyers who had indicated their unavailability during the period should not be compelled to attend court proceedings.

The Association said it was responding to petitions from Zoe, Akyea & Co, Dame & Partners, and Sam Okudzeto & Associates, who raised concerns over notices served on them by virtue of warrants issued to specific judges to continue hearing part-heard criminal cases during the vacation.

The GBA explained that under the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004, C.I. 47, particularly Order 79, Rule 4, the High Court observes three vacations annually, with the second and longest running from August 1 to September 30.

It said the provision exists to give lawyers, judges and judicial staff a deserved period of rest after the second term, which is the longest in the legal calendar.

While acknowledging that Vacation Courts and Virtual Courts have, by convention, been designated to handle emergencies such as interlocutory matters, the GBA stressed that these courts do not conduct trials.

It maintained that the overriding consideration for any matter before a Vacation Judge should be the willingness and availability of counsel to appear, adding that lawyers are under no compulsion to attend court during the vacation.

“Once Counsel in a matter indicates their unavailability to attend Court during the vacation, even though the Court may have listed their case, it cannot proceed with the case in any way,” the letter stated.

The Association noted that this position applies whether one or both sides indicate their inability to proceed with a case.