HERMAN KWABENA AGYAPONG & ORS. vs. THE GHANA BROADCASTING CORPORATION [2005]DLCA6490

Date	2005-12-09
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. CA. 107/20
Citation No.	[2005]DLCA6490

AKAMBA JA [PRESIDING]

TWENEBOA-KODUA JA

ANIN YEBOAH JA

MRS. SAMUEL SETH WOOD FOR THE PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS

MR. OPOKU ADJEI FOR THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENTS

[2005]DLCA6490
																																						<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" >HERMAN KWABENA AGYAPONG &amp; ORS.<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE GHANA BROADCASTING CORPORATION<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>CIVIL
APPEAL NO. CA. 107/20&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:
9TH DECEMBER, 2005<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">

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

MRS. SAMUEL SETH WOOD FOR
THE PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS.<o:p></o:p>

MR. OPOKU ADJEI FOR THE
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENTS.<o:p></o:p>

</div>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;&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>AKAMBA JA [PRESIDING], TWENEBOA-KODUA
JA, ANIN YEBOAH JA<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">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;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>TWENEBOA-KODUA,
JA <o:p></o:p>This is an appeal from the
judgment delivered on 14 March 2002 by the High Court, Accra.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The plaintiffs/appellants, hereinafter simply
called plaintiffs, were adjudged to recover against the
defendants/respondents/respondents, a statutory corporate body, hereinafter
simply called the corporation, reliefs as follows:—<o:p></o:p>a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; payment
to each plaintiff his/her salaries from 4 November 1988 (i.e. the date of
dismissals) to August 1992 (i.e. the date that the dismissals were commuted to
termination of appointment) as lump-sum compensation for wrongful dismissal,
and<o:p></o:p>b)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; payment
of another 12 months' salaries to each plaintiff to be calculated from August
1992 to July 1993 as damages for wrongful dismissal and<o:p></o:p>c)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; payment
of all other allowances, remunerations or benefits that the plaintiffs were
entitled to within this period of wrongful dismissal and termination of
appointment as stipulated under their Collective Bargaining Agreement.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;............... additional costs of
¢200,000.00 [granted] in favour of each of the thirty-four (34)
plaintiffs." <o:p></o:p>Dissatisfied with the
awards above, particularly with the quantum of each head and/or the assessment
thereof, the plaintiffs lodged an appeal on one main ground and gave notice of
filing further grounds of appeal subsequently. <o:p></o:p>Pursuant to leave granted
by the court, two additional grounds were filed on 7 January 2004 by the
plaintiffs. The ground and the additional grounds of appeal were formulated as
follows:—<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The main ground: "The judge having made a
finding that the dismissal of the Plaintiffs on 4 November 1988 which was later
commuted to termination in 1992 was void ab initio erred when he held that the
plaintiffs' unpaid salaries and other entitlements be paid from 4 November 1988
to August instead of from 4 November 1988 to the date of final judgment on 14
March 2002."<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The additional ground one: "The Learned
High Court Judge erred in law by not setting out his reasoning in sufficient
detail to make entirely clear the principles on which he had acted in arriving
at "12 months' salaries" as damages for wrongful dismissal in section
(sic)(b) of the judgment." <o:p></o:p>The
additional ground two: "The Learned High Court Judge erred in law by not
setting out his reasoning in sufficient detail to make entirely clear why he
declined to award any interest on the various amounts awarded under the 3 heads
(a), (b) and (c) of the judgment."<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;From the Record of Appeal, the plaintiffs were
employees of the defendant Corporation until 4 November 1988. Four years
earlier on, some misunderstanding developed between a section of the workers of
the Corporation on the one hand and the Corporation on the o</main>