[2017]DLSC17805 • November 29, 2017 • Supreme Court •
JOHN TENMOTTEY AFFUAH & CHARLES OKPATTAH vs. GENERAL DEVELOPMENTS COMPANY LIMITED
The plaintiffs, long-serving employees of the defendant company, disputed the adequacy of terminal benefits paid upon termination of their employment. They relied on a document titled 'Conditions of Service for Senior Staff GDC Limited, Reviewed 1st August 1988' (Exhibit F), which they claimed embodied their binding employment contract terms. The defendant contended that Exhibit F was unsigned and thus unenforceable. The plaintiffs accepted payments offered but later challenged them as inadequate per Exhibit F's terms.
read moreJUDGMENT BENIN, JSC:- The core issue raised in this appeal is this: in what circumstances, if at all, will an unexecuted document give rise to legal consequences? The parties herein are disputing over a document which purports to embody the terms and conditions of their employment relationship. Whereas the plaintiffs/appellants/respondents, called the plaintiffs, are saying that the document contains a binding contract, the defendant/respondent/appellant, called the defendant, says otherwise. The plaintiffs were the employees of the defendant for periods of over twenty-five and five years respectively. Upon the termination of their appointments for reasons which are not in dispute, the defendant calculated and paid the plaintiffs various sums of money which it considered to be their just recompense. The plaintiffs signed relevant papers and received the benefits. But soon thereafter they caused their Solicitors to write to the defendant to complain about the amounts awarded them whi...