Nolle Prosequi In Civil

Summary

In Ghana, a nolle prosequi is specific to criminal cases, meaning the Attorney-General cannot use it in civil cases. The WTO dispute settlement system, operational since 1995, builds on nearly 50 years of GATT 1947 experience. The DSU, or Dispute Settlement Understanding, outlines principles for managing trade disputes.

Full Conversation

in civil actions.... when the attorney General enters a nolle prosequi.... does that make the AG a third party to the case or he becomes the new plaintiff
Hello ****,
Thank you for your question. In civil actions, a "nolle prosequi" typically applies to criminal cases and not civil cases. In criminal cases, when the Attorney General enters a nolle prosequi, it means they are dropping the charges, not becoming a new plaintiff or third party.
Is your case a criminal or civil case?
Can an Attorney-General enter nolle prosequi in civil cases?
Hello ****,
In Ghana, the concept of "nolle prosequi" is specific to criminal cases. The Attorney-General cannot enter a nolle prosequi in civil cases. It is a decision to discontinue criminal proceedings.
Do you have any other questions regarding your legal issue?
Nana Akuamoah Boateng v Yeboah
Hello ****,
Thank you for providing the case name. Could you please clarify whether Nana Akuamoah Boateng v Yeboah is a civil or criminal case? This will help me provide you with the most accurate information.
civil case
Hello ****,
Thank you for confirming that it is a civil case. In civil cases, the Attorney-General does not have the authority to enter a nolle prosequi. This term is exclusive to criminal cases.
Is there a specific aspect of the civil case Nana Akuamoah Boateng v Yeboah that you need more information on?
"The WTO dispute settlement system, which has been in operation since * January *, was not established out of the blue. "what does it mean?
Hello ****,
The phrase "The WTO dispute settlement system, which has been in operation since * January *, was not established out of the blue" means that the system was not created suddenly or without any prior context. It implies that there were preceding events, negotiations, or systems that led to its creation.
Is there anything specific you need help with regarding this phrase or any other legal issue?
"The WTO dispute settlement system, which has been in operation since * January *, was not established out of the blue. It is not an entirely novel system. On the contrary, this system is based on, and has taken on board, almost fifty years of experience in the resolution of trade disputes in the context of the GATT *. Article *.* of the DSU states: Members affirm their adherence to the principles for the management of disputes heretofore applied under Articles XXII and XXIII of GATT * and the rules and procedures as further elaborated and modified herein." what does this mean?
Hello ****,
The text explains that the WTO dispute settlement system, established in *, was built on nearly 50 years of experience from the GATT *. Article *.* of the DSU indicates that WTO members commit to the same principles and procedures previously used under GATT *, integrating and enhancing them.
Is there anything specific you need help with regarding this text or any other legal issue?
What is the full meaning of DSU?
Hello ****,
The full meaning of DSU is "Dispute Settlement Understanding."
Is there anything else you need help with regarding the DSU or any other legal issue?
"Contentious Jurisdiction Unlike the International Court of Justice or the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the WTO dispute settlement system has only contentious, and not advisory, jurisdiction. In US – Wool Shirts and Blouses (*), the Appellate Body held: Given the explicit aim of dispute settlement that permeates the DSU, we do not consider that Article *.* of the DSU is meant to encourage either panels or the Appellate Body to ‘make law’ by clarifying existing provisions of the WTO Agreement outside the context of resolving a particular dispute. * The WTO dispute settlement system is called upon to clarify WTO law only in the context of an actual dispute. * In EC – Commercial Vessels (*), the panel declined to address a matter before it because it did not consider that ‘an abstract ruling on hypothetical future measures’ was either necessary or helpful to the resolution of that dispute. *" what does it mean in simple terms?
Hello ****,
In simple terms, the WTO dispute settlement system only deals with actual disputes between countries, not hypothetical or advisory opinions. It clarifies WTO laws only when resolving specific cases, not to make new laws or give opinions on future scenarios.
Is there anything else you need help with regarding this or any other legal issue?