DANIEL JOJO RICHARDSON vs. TV3 NETWORK LIMITED [2002]DLCA6705

Date	2002-12-19
Suit No.	C.A. 120/2001
Citation No.	[2002]DLCA6705

ADINYIRA JA

OWUSU-ANSAH JA

ADDO JA

KWAME DADZOE FOR APPELLANT

ABLA MASOPERH FOR RESPONDENT

[2002]DLCA6705
																																						<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" >DANIEL JOJO RICHARDSON<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>TV3 NETWORK LIMITED<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

C.A. 120/2001&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; DATE: 19TH DECEMBER, 2002<o:p></o:p>

ABLA
MASOPERH FOR RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%;
border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>OWUSU-ANSAH, JA <o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff/Appellant was employed by the Defendant in June 1997 as a Cameraman.
He became Executive Cameraman and Chairman of the Local Branch of the Public
Service Workers’ Union (PSWU) <o:p></o:p>On
the 3rd of February 2000, the Plaintiff was summarily dismissed from the
employment of the Defendant. His salary at that time was ¢485,881.00 per month
or ¢5,830,572.00 per annum. <o:p></o:p>The
Plaintiff was aggrieved by the said dismissal. He therefore caused a Writ of
Summons to be issued against the Defendant for the following reliefs:<o:p></o:p>(a)&nbsp;&nbsp;
“A declaration that his dismissal by the Defendant is unlawful; <o:p></o:p>(b)&nbsp;&nbsp;
Damages for unlawful dismissal <o:p></o:p>(c)&nbsp;&nbsp;
Costs.” <o:p></o:p>At
the hearing of the Summons for Directions the following issues were agreed for
trial. <o:p></o:p>(i)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
“Whether or not the Defendant has the power
to dismiss the Plaintiff for failure to work after 5.00pm; <o:p></o:p>(ii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Whether or not overtime is compulsory; <o:p></o:p>(iii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Whether or not the Plaintiff was informed
far in advance that the production of “ASANKA DELIGHT” had been shifted. <o:p></o:p>(iv)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
When the said information was given; <o:p></o:p>(v)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
How the information was communicated to the
Plaintiff.” <o:p></o:p>The
Plaintiff’s evidence was that on the 14th December 1999 he consulted the Notice
Board where assignments are published. On the Board he had been assigned to a
Programme “ASANKA DELIGHT” – a programme on how to prepare local dishes. <o:p></o:p>The
next day (15th December 1999) he went to work to shoot the “ASANKA DELIGHT”
Programme. <o:p></o:p>According
to the Plaintiff he sat through from 8.00 am to 5.15 pm. No production took
place.&nbsp; He therefore went and told his
immediate boss that he was going to his house. He was then told that the time
for the programme had changed, and therefore, he had to wait. <o:p></o:p>