GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION vs. GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK LTD [2002]DLCA6464

Date	2002-07-11
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO.: 166/2000
Citation No.	[2002]DLCA6464

BROBBEY JA. (PRESIDING)

TWUMASI JA.

AKOTO-BAMFOR JA.

[2002]DLCA6464
																																						<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" >GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK LTD.<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>CIVIL
APPEAL NO.: 166/2000&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE:&nbsp;
11TH JULY, 2002<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">

CORAM: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>

</div><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;border:none;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in;
mso-border-between:1.5pt solid windowtext;mso-padding-between:1.0pt">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>BROBBEY,
J.A. <o:p></o:p>Six people, suing for
themselves and 764 others, originally instituted an action in the High Court.
All the plaintiffs were pensioners of the Ghana Commercial Bank Limited.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Their initial claims were for the following reliefs;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“ 1. A declaration that the plaintiffs are
entitled to be paid their pension rights in accordance with the defendant’s
Board of Directors Amendment decision of 27th February 1987. <o:p></o:p>2. Arrears of pension due
plaintiffs with interest at current bank rate with effect from 1st July 1989.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;3. Damages for breach of contract <o:p></o:p>4. An order of perpetual
injunction restraining defendant bank from transferring any of its assets or
changing its legal identity or ownership of itself by way of sale, assignment
or divestiture in any form until plaintiffs’ entitlements would have been paid
and concrete of Directors Amendment decision of 27th February 1987. Arrears of
pension to the plaintiffs as from 1st July 1989. The rate of interest to be
subject to agreement.”. <o:p></o:p>The plaintiffs
subsequently abandoned reliefs three and four on the writ of summons. <o:p></o:p>When the trial commenced,
counsel for the defendant bank submitted to judgment on relief one. The
plaintiffs filed judgment after trial in which they stated that the trial court
had “adjudged that the defendant bank should pay the plaintiffs all their
pension rights in accordance with the defendant’s Board of Directors Amendment
decision of 27th February 1987. Arrears of pension to the plaintiffs as from
1st July 1989. The rate of interest to be subject to agreement.”<o:p></o:p>At the trial court, the
defendant bank submitted to only relief one. Counsel for the defendant
indicated that he had instructions to attempt settlement with counsel for the
plaintiffs on the question of interest. In order to arrive at the correct
interest, the parties decided to go into accounts. The defendant bank filed a
statement of accounts setting out what in its view was due to each member of
the plaintiffs’ Association. The parties failed to agree on the accounts. <o:p></o:p>The next main move in the
case was that the trial judge appointed as referee Mr. W. K. Nketia of the
Accra High Court Registry to “go into accounts with both parties.” That was
done. The referee submitted his report.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Following the report, the plaintiffs filed an
application in the High Court praying for the definitions of the expressions
“current basic salary” and “automatic adjustment of pensions whenever salaries
change.” The trial court ruled in favour of the plaintiffs. The defendants appealed
to the Court of Appeal against that ruling and the plaintiffs too cross
appealed against it.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;It was then discovered that the trial court
did not enter formal judgment on the admitted relief. The Court of Appeal ruled
that since no formal judgment was entered by the trial court, there was no
judgment to be enforced. It ordered that the case should be sent back to the
High Court to be heard on its merits.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;An application was filed in the Supreme Court
for an order of certiorari to quash the ruling of the Court of Appeal and for
another order of mandamus to compel the Court of Appeal to rehear the matter
before it in accordance with the Court of Appeal Rules, 1997 (C.I.19), rules 31
and 32. The Supreme Court granted the applications and ordered that this Court
should enter the judgment that the trial court failed to enter and proceed to
dispose of the appeal as filed by the parties in this court. At the last
sitting here, this court entered judgment as ordered. <o:p></o:p>We now proceed to dispose
of the appeal in the terms of the arguments filed by the parties before us. The
defendant bank shall hereafter be described as the appellant and the plaintiffs
shall be described as the respondents.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;In the ruling of the trial court which
favoured the plaintiffs and which gave rise to this appeal, the trial judge
ordered that a letter from the Ministry of Finance on payment of pensions based
on consolidated salary was applicable to the defendant bank and further that
the pension to be paid was to be based on 50% of the consolidated salary. From
those rulings, the first two grounds of appeal filed by the appellants read as
follows; <o:p></o:p>