AKUFO AND OTHERS vs VOLTA ALUMINIUM CO LTD [2000]DLCA109

Date	2000-03-02
Suit No.
Citation No.	[2000]DLCA109

BROBBEY JA

AFREH JA

ANSAH JA

DR SETH TWUM FOR THE APPELLANTS.

DANSO ACHEAMPONG FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[2000]DLCA109
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">AKUFO AND OTHERS<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">VOLTA ALUMINIUM CO LTD<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1999-2000]
2 GLR 807<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid black .5pt;padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="right" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:right;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid black .5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">Date:
2 MARCH 2000<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:DR SETH TWUM FOR THE
APPELLANTS.DANSO ACHEAMPONG FOR THE
RESPONDENT.__________________________________________________________________CORAM:BROBBEY, AFREH AND ANSAH
JJA__________________________________________________________________JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>Brobbey JA. <o:p></o:p>The
respondent company employed the appellants until 16 May 1994 when they were
declared redundant. They were paid two months’ salary in lieu of notice and
their employment terminated. Dissatisfied with the two months’ salary, they
issued a writ of summons at the High Court, Tema claiming:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">&nbsp;“(i) A declaration that the calculation of
their terminal benefits should be based on the amount of remuneration which
would have accrued to them by 15 July 1994. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(ii)
An order directing the defendants to pay plaintiffs the balance of their
terminal benefits on (i) above. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(iii)
Interest on the balance from the day it became due to the date of payment.”<o:p></o:p>After
the trial at the High Court, Tema judgment was given in favour of the
respondent company. Dissatisfied with the judgment, the appellants appealed to
this court on the main grounds that:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“(a)
The learned trial judge erred in law when he held that the calculation of the
plaintiffs’ end-of-service benefits (redundancy) benefits ought not to be based
on the amount of remuneration which would have accrued to them by 15 July 1994.
<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(b)
The learned trial judge misconceived the legal point in controversy when he
held that the calculation of the plaintiffs’ end-of-service benefits on the
basis that the plaintiffs’ employment had been terminated with effect from the
16 May 1994 was proper, since by the contract of employment, the ‘Labour
Agreement’, the date of termination of employment was not necessarily the basis
upon which end-of-service benefits were to be calculated. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(c)
The learned trial judge erred in law when he held that the plaintiffs’
contention proceeds on the fallacy of ‘if we had been given two months’ notice’
when this was not the factual situation. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">