NANA A. TIA-TOAI & 8 OTHERS vs DIVESTITURE IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE [2009]DLHC16642

Date	2009-06-05
Suit No.	SUIT NO. AHR 15/2009
Citation No.	[2009]DLHC16642

HIS LORDSHIP SAMUEL K. A. ASIEDU J.

JOE ABOAGYE DEBRAH

[2009]DLHC16642
																																						<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" >NANA A. TIA-TOAI &amp; 8 OTHERS<o:p></o:p>(APPLICANTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>DIVESTITURE IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&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 style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: black; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 2.1pt;">

JOE ABOAGYE DEBRAH FOR APPLICANTS<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>HIS LORDSHIP SAMUEL K. A. ASIEDU J. <o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: black; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: black; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 2.1pt;">

RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;The
applicants filed a motion on notice supported by an affidavit under Order 67 of
the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004, CI.47 by which they invoked the
jurisdiction of the Court under Article 33(1) to enforce their fundamental
human rights under Article 12 and 17 of the constitution of the Republic of
Ghana.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;In
order to appreciate the ground under which the applicants have brought this application,
I have decided to set out in full the relevant portions of the applicants’
affidavit in support; particularly, paragraphs 2 to 14.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“2.&nbsp;&nbsp;
That all the applicants are ex-senior members of staff of Gihoc Footwear
Company &nbsp;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Limited (hereinafter
referred to as Gihoc Footwear) based in Kumasi aforesaid.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That following the
divestiture of the Gihoc Footwear in 2004 a package was agreed <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;in accordance with the prevailing senior staff
conditions of service dated February 7, <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp; 1983,
a copy of which is attached as exhibit A.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;4.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That Respondent entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with Gihoc <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
 Footwear to pay terminal benefits
of all qualifying staff as per the terms of Exhibit B <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
 attached.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;5.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That due to delays in payment and hardships being encountered by the
ex-employees, <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
 &nbsp;the Applicants petitioned for part-payment of
their terminal benefits.&nbsp; See exhibits C <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &amp; D attached.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;6.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That pursuant to prevailing agreements, the Applicants were entitled to
payment of 17 <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&</main>