Drawing from my extensive experience in compliance and corporate governance at banks like GCB Bank, where I’ve dealt with litigation under Ghanaian laws influenced by common law principles, I’ll explain these concepts practically. Ghana’s legal system, per the 1992 Constitution and Courts Act, 1993 (Act 459), relies on precedents and court structures, relevant to banking disputes like contract breaches or negligence claims.

a) Ratio Decidendi vs. Obiter Dicta 

• Similarities:

  • Both are elements of judicial decisions in case law, a key source of law under Topic 1 (Sources of Law).
  • They arise from court judgments and contribute to legal reasoning, aiding conflict resolution in banking scenarios, e.g., interpreting BoG directives.
  • Influenced by statutory interpretation rules, they ensure consistency in applying laws like Act 930 to disputes.

• Differences:

  Aspect	Ratio Decidendi	Obiter Dicta
  Definition	The binding reason or principle of law on which the decision is based, forming precedent.	Incidental remarks or opinions not essential to the decision, non-binding.
  Binding Force	Mandatory for lower courts under stare decisis (e.g., Supreme Court ratios bind High Courts).	Persuasive but not obligatory; can influence future cases but not enforce them.
  Purpose	Determines the outcome; essential for the judgment.	Hypothetical or advisory comments; expands on issues.
  Application in Banking	In cases like negligence in lending (e.g., bank’s duty of care), the ratio sets rules for future recoveries.	Obiter might suggest ethical practices, like in post-2017 cleanup rulings on governance.

  Practical example: In the Ghanaian case of Republic v. High Court (Commercial Division) Accra; Ex parte: Ecobank Ghana Ltd (2018), the ratio on fiduciary duties binds banks, while obiter on digital risks is advisory for BoG’s Cyber Directive compliance.

b) Assessors vs. Jurors 

• Similarities:

  • Both assist judges in fact-finding and decision-making within Ghana’s court system (Topic 2: Conflict Resolution).
  • Involved in trials to ensure fairness, especially in complex cases like banking fraud under Act 930.
  • Appointed under legal frameworks; their input promotes justice in quasi-judicial processes.

• Differences:

  Aspect	Assessors	Jurors
  Role and Appointment	Experts or laypersons assisting in specialized trials (e.g., commercial courts); appointed by judge per Courts Act.	Lay citizens randomly selected for jury trials in serious criminal cases (e.g., treason).
  Binding Nature	Advisory; judge not bound but considers opinions (common in High Court civil matters).	Decide facts/verdict in criminal trials; binding unless judge directs otherwise.
  Usage in Ghana	Prevalent in civil/commercial disputes (e.g., land mortgages under customary law).	Limited to indictable offenses; rare in banking law, more for criminal like embezzlement.
  Expertise	Often domain-specific (e.g., valuers in property security cases).	No required expertise; represent community views.

  Practical example: In banking tort cases (e.g., defamation via wrongful dishonor), assessors help evaluate damages, as in disputes post-UT Bank collapse, while jurors might feature in fraud trials under BoG investigations.