[2003]DLCA6467 Login to Read Full Case <span style="font-size: 18px !important;"><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; color:#00B0F0">GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK PENSIONS ASSOCIATION<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><i><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">(PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; color:#00B0F0">GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><i><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">(DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">CIVIL APPEAL NO.: 399/2002 DATE: 12TH FEBRUARY, 2003<o:p></o:p></span></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"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="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"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">COUNSEL: <o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="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"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">DR. W. C. EKOW DANIELS WITH ANDREW DANIELS FOR RESPONDENTS<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="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"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif""> ANTHONY NOVOR FOR APPLICANTS<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></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" style="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;padding-bottom:1.0pt;mso-padding-bottom-alt:1.0pt; border-bottom:1.5pt solid windowtext;mso-border-bottom-alt:1.5pt solid windowtext"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">CORAM: </span></b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">MRS. ADINYIRA JA (PRESIDING), MRS. AKOTO-BAMFOR JA., TWENEBOAH-KODUAH JA.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <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;padding-top: 1.0pt;mso-padding-top-alt:0in"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">RULING<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">ADINYIRA, JA <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The applicant in this case is seeking an order for a stay of execution of an order for a writ of sequestration pending appeal. This order of a writ of sequestration was made ex parte on 14th October 2002 in respect of a judgment of 24th June 2002 entered by the Court of Appeal against the defendant/applicant.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif""> "in terms of relief 1 of the writ of summons that is to say that by reason of the submission to judgment made by the defendant bank before the trial judge on 22nd February 1999, it is hereby declared that the plaintiffs are entitled to be paid their pension rights in accordance with the defendant's Board Of Directors amendment decision of 27 February 1987". <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">This judgment of 24 June 2002 was made by the Court of Appeal upon the orders of the Supreme Court to enable it to dispose of an appeal pending before it against the High Court ruling of 20 December 2000 on the interpretation of the terms 'current basic salary' and 'automatic adjustment of pension whenever salaries changed', which had appeared in the decisions of the Board Of Directors of Defendant Bank referred to in the judgment after trial. The Court of Appeal gave judgment on 11th July 2002.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif""> It is the contention of Counsel for the applicant that in the said Court of Appeal judgment it was held that the parties herein should negotiate the percentage to be used to determine the pension based on the consolidated salary. But before this condition precedent could be fulfilled the respondent applied for an order for a writ of sequestration. They applied to the High Court to set it aside on the ground that it was premature, but it was refused on 19th November 2002. The applicants filed an appeal against this ruling on 21st November 2002. They then applied for a stay of execution of the writ of sequestration but it was refused on 2nd December 2002, and hence this present application before us. The sum of the submissions by counsel for the respondent was that the order relied upon by the applicant amounts to a revision of the judgment that they have submitted to. The pronouncement of the Court of appeal being relied upon is a mere obiter and a directive, which is not binding. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">We have considered these arguments and the affidavits before us and it is clear to us that in the judgment of 11th July 2002 the Court of Appeal was considering 2 original grounds of appeal and an additional ground of appeal filed before it. Ground 2 of the grounds appeal is the one relevant to the application before us. This states:—<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif""> "The learned High Court Judge erred when he sought to impose on the defendant 50% of the consolidated salary as pension to the plaintiff in the face of evidence that there has been an internal mechanism and procedure used by the parties herein for reviewing pension entitlements."<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif""> In the judgment the court allowed the appeal on this ground and ordered that the parties negotiate on the percentage to be used. Therefore counsel for the respondents argument that the said order was obiter cannot be accurate, having regard to the fact that it was a ground of appeal canvassed before it and considered by the Court of Appeal. It is obvious from the face of the record that an express order was made by the Court. Since this order has not been complied with, the learned judge erred in granting the order for the writ of sequestration. Consequently since there are serious issues to be determined on appeal, we would exercise our discretion in favour of the applicant. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The application for a stay of execution of the order for the writ of sequestration is accordingly granted. No order as to cost. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"> </p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><o:p> </o:p></p></span>