Appeals by Non-Parties in Ghana: Reconciling Procedural Orthodoxy with Substantive Justice.

Abstract

This article examines the emerging jurisprudence on appeals by non-parties within Ghanaian appellate procedure and the evolving tension between procedural orthodoxy and substantive justice. Traditionally, Ghanaian appellate law has been governed by the doctrine that appeals are creatures of statute, thereby restricting appellate right primarily to parties formally joined in proceedings. However, recent judicial developments reveal an increasing willingness by the courts to extend appellate remedies to non-parties whose legal rights or substantial interests are prejudicially affected by judicial decisions. Using a doctrinal and comparative legal methodology, the article analyses the constitutional and statutory framework governing appellate jurisdiction in Ghana, with particular emphasis on the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Stanley Kotei Hammond v G K Agbleze & Others. The article further evaluates the influence of English common law authorities, including In re Securities Insurance Company, on Ghanaian jurisprudence. It argues that while procedural certainty and finality of litigation remain important objectives, rigid procedural formalism should not defeat constitutional values of fairness, access to justice, and effective judicial protection of rights. The study concludes that Ghanaian appellate jurisprudence is progressively constitutionalising substantive justice by recognising limited appellate standing for non-parties adversely affected by judicial decisions.

Keywords: Non-party appeals; Appellate jurisdiction; Substantive justice; Procedural orthodoxy; Appellate standing; Constitutional justice; Ghanaian appellate law; Access to justice

DOI: 10.7176/JLPG/153-03

Publication date: June 28^th 2026