Land Reform Commission v. Grand Central Ltd. – sllr 1981 volume 2 page 147

In Grand Central Ltd. (Plaintiff‑Respondent) v. Land Reform Commission (Defendant‑Petitioner), the court addressed whether an officer holding the office of Attorney‑General may appear before the courts in a private capacity as an attorney‑at‑law, rather than solely in an official role. It was determined that the unique constitutional, statutory, and traditional expectations governing the office mandate exclusive representation of the state and prohibit appearances in a private capacity, particularly where the integrity and impartiality of the proceedings could be compromised. The holding reaffirmed that the Attorney‑General’s functions are intimately connected with duties to the state and public interest, relying on constitutional articles, the Judicature Act, and historical precedent. The