<p class="mb-5" id="contentDlCitation" hidden>[2006]DLCA7480</p> <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: 18px !important;"><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; color:#00B0F0">REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:6.0pt;text-align:center; line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; color:#00B0F0">THE COMMITTEE OF ENQUIRY INTO EQUIPMENT PROCUREMENT & GHANA PORTS AND HARBOURS AUTHORITY<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"> <p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">CIVIL APPEAL NO. H1/170/05 </span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> DATE: 12<sup>TH</sup> MAY,2006<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: 115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: 115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">MR. SEY FOR APPELLANTS<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: 115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm; mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">MR. ENOH-ARMAH ANDOH FOR RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: 115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">CORAM:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: 115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">ARYEETEY J.A. (PRESIDING), QUAYE J.A., ANIN YEBOAH J.A.<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 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"> <p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; 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:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">ARYEETEY, J.A.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> On 12th June, 2002 the respondent in this appeal filed a motion on notice in the High Court, Tema for a writ of certiorari to issue to quash the findings of the first appellant committee as well as the subsequent decision of the second appellant authority to dismiss the respondent from his position as Acting Chief Executive of Ghapoha Football Club Limited. He based his application for certiorari on the following facts: On 31st December, 2001, the second appellant, Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority set up a committee of enquiry into Equipment Procurement and Transfer of Players in the Ghapoha Football Club Limited. Following the report of the committee the second appellants dismissed the respondent from his employment as the Acting Chief Executive of Ghapoha Football Club Limited. The outright dismissal of the respondent was later reduced by the second appellants to termination of his appointment upon a petition by him addressed to the second appellants, his employers. It was his contention in his application for certiorari that since the Ghapoha Football Club, was a separate legal entity from the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority, the management of the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority acted far in excess of its jurisdiction in setting up a committee of enquiry into the affairs of the separate legal entity and purporting to dismiss him after the committee had submitted its findings to them. That, upon the advice of his counsel, was tantamount to clear case of ‘lack of jurisdiction or want of jurisdiction on the part of GHAPOHA'. He also complained that he was not given the chance to cross-examine witnesses who made unfounded allegations against him. Furthermore, since the committee did not make adverse findings against him the second appellants did not only act without jurisdiction but also acted in error and therefore certiorari would lie to quash their decision or order.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> In their affidavit in opposition the appellants maintained that Ghana Ports and Harbours Football Club Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority and all the board members of the football club are employees of the authority. According to them although the Committee of Enquiry made findings and recommendations no decision was made by that body. They insist the Committee of Enquiry made adverse findings against the respondent to the effect that the sum of ¢50,000,000.00 realised from the transfer of players had been received by the respondent in an inappropriate manner and ¢1,900,000.00 of that amount remains unaccounted for by the respondent. They maintain that the respondent's conduct during his tenure as Chief Executive Officer was unmeritorious, dishonest and tainted with fraud as evidenced by the report of the committee. That of course formed the basis of the decision of the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority management board to dismiss the respondent in this appeal. Since the Committee of Enquiry did not come out with any decision but only made recommendations and on the face of the record did not make any error of law nor breach any rule of natural justice, the application for certiorari therefore was misconceived, frivolous and without any basis. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">In its ruling the court below in effect was in full agreement with the stand taken by the appellants that the Committee of Enquiry did not come out with any decision nor did breach any rule of natural justice upon which a grant of certiorari could be based. All the same the court below based its grant of certiorari on the dismissal letter which was supposed to have come under article 85 of supposedly non-existent Senior Staff Conditions of Service. This is reflected in the last paragraph of the ruling appearing at pages 142 and 143 of the record of appeal as follows: <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">"There is no dispute that the applicant was issued a dismissal letter which purported to dismiss him under Article 89 of the Senior Staff Conditions of Service. The respondents' reply however is that at the relevant time of the enquiry there was not in existence the Senior Staff Association therefore their member could not be on it. The association has been disbanded. Like counsel for the applicant queried, why then did the respondents have to quote the Senior Staff Conditions of Service which if the association did not exist the respondent would not be obliged to proceed on the basis of the condition of service of the Senior Staff Association in dismissing the applicant. Having quoted the Conditions of Service as the basis for the dismissal of the applicant can the respondent now say that the Senior Staff Association whose Conditions of Service they relied on was not [in] existence? If the association did not exist as the respondents contend then the Condition of Service itself can't be applicable for the respondent to rely on. The Condition of Service became inoperative on the disbanding of the Senior Staff Association as contended by the respondents. To me it is clear that the dismissal of the applicant on a non existent and [inoperative] authority was an exercise in futility clearly wrong and null and void quashable by an order or certiorari."<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> The respondents/appellants appealed and their grounds of appeal were: 1) The ruling was against the weight of evidence adduced at the hearing. 2) The trial judge erred in law in making an order which purported to Quash the decision of the management of the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority to terminate the respondent's appointment.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> In his analysis of the evidence the learned judge of the court below seemed to have come to the conclusion that the existence of the Senior Staff Conditions of Service is tied up with the existence of an operating Senior Staff Association. A look at the GHANA PORTS & HARBOURS AUTHORITY CONDITIONS OF SERVICE FOR SENIOR OFFICERS which can be found at pages 82-98 of the record of appeal would be helpful. That document became effective from 1st January, 1997. No representative of a Senior Staff Association was a signatory to the document. It was signed only by the Acting Director-General at the time of Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority. The opening paragraphs of the docu</main>
