The writ of prohibition is the counterpart of mandamus, to restrain subordinate courts and inferior judicial tribunals from exceeding their jurisdiction where no other legal remedy or relief is given. The granting or refusal thereof is governed by the same principles of right, necessity, and justice as apply to mandamus; provided, however, that no writ of prohibition to compel the removal of a judge shall issue where no motion to recuse has been filed, if such motion is available, or where a motion to recuse has been denied after assignment to a separate judge for hearing.
§ 9-6-40.Prohibition counterpart of mandamus
Chapter 6. Extraordinary Writs · Article 3. Prohibition · Last amended 2009 · Last verified July 17, 2026
In one sentenceThis section defines the writ of prohibition as the counterpart of mandamus, used to restrain subordinate courts and inferior judicial tribunals from exceeding their jurisdiction when no other legal remedy exists, governed by the same principles as mandamus and subject to the same judge-recusal limitation.
Full Text of § 9-6-40
Plain-English Summary
If mandamus compels an official to act, prohibition does the opposite: it stops a subordinate court or inferior judicial tribunal from going beyond its jurisdiction. This section calls prohibition the counterpart of mandamus, and that framing carries through the rest of the rule.
Like mandamus, prohibition is not available whenever a party is dissatisfied with a tribunal’s ruling — it applies to jurisdictional overreach specifically, and only where no other legal remedy or relief is given. And the statute borrows mandamus’s own standard for deciding when to grant or refuse the writ: the same principles of right, necessity, and justice apply to both.
The section closes with the same judge-removal limitation found in the mandamus statute. A writ of prohibition aimed at removing a judge will not issue unless an available motion to recuse was filed first, and it will not issue where a recusal motion has already been denied after assignment to a separate judge for hearing. That channels judge-removal disputes through the recusal process under either writ.
Frequently Asked Questions
How does the writ of prohibition relate to the writ of mandamus?
The section calls prohibition the counterpart of mandamus, and it applies the same principles of right, necessity, and justice that govern mandamus.
What kind of overreach does a writ of prohibition target?
It targets subordinate courts and inferior judicial tribunals exceeding their jurisdiction.
Is prohibition available if another legal remedy exists?
No. The writ applies only where no other legal remedy or relief is given.
What standards govern whether a court grants or refuses a writ of prohibition?
The granting or refusal of the writ is governed by the same principles of right, necessity, and justice that apply to mandamus.
Can a writ of prohibition be used to remove a judge without first pursuing recusal?
No. The section bars a writ of prohibition to compel a judge’s removal where no motion to recuse has been filed, if such a motion was available, or where a recusal motion has already been denied after assignment to a separate judge for hearing.
Amendment History
Orig. Code 1863, § 3136; Code 1868, § 3148; Code 1873, § 3209a; Code 1882, § 3209a; Civil Code 1895, § 4885; Civil Code 1910, § 5458; Code 1933, § 64-301; Ga. L. 2009, p. 643, § 2/HB 221.
Source & verification. Section text and amendment history are
reproduced verbatim from the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, published by the
Official Code of Georgia Annotated, Georgia Code Revision Commission / LexisNexis. Last verified July 17, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: georgia writ of prohibitionprohibition mandamus counterpart georgiarestrain court exceeding jurisdiction georgiageorgia writ of prohibition judge recusal