WILLIAM G.K. THOMPSON vs. TOTAL GHANA LIMITED [2010]DLSC2520

Date	2010-08-11
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/3/2010
Citation No.	[2010]DLSC2520

WOOD (MRS) CJ (PRESIDING)

BROBBEY JSC

DOTSE JSC

YEBOAH JSC

GBADEGBE JSC

PEASAH-BOADU FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/APPELLANT.

ROCKSON NELSON DEFEAMEKPOR FOR THE PLAINTIFF /RESPONDENT /RESPONDENT.

[2010]DLSC2520
																																						<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" >WILLIAM G.K. THOMPSON<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>TOTAL GHANA LIMITED<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[SUPREME COURT, 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">

CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/3/2010&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&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: 11TH
AUGUST, 2010<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>PEASAH-BOADU
FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/APPELLANT.<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">

ROCKSON NELSON DEFEAMEKPOR FOR THE
PLAINTIFF /RESPONDENT /RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <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">

WOOD
(MRS) CJ (PRESIDING), BROBBEY JSC, DOTSE JSC, YEBOAH JSC, GBADEGBE &nbsp;JSC<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>YEBOAH, JSC:- <o:p></o:p>This an appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal dated 31 July
2008, which affirmed the previous decision of the trial High Court, Accra.<o:p></o:p>The respondent herein, who commenced the action as plaintiff at the
High Court, Accra was at the time material to the action The Retail Network
Development Manager of the appellant’s company. He had been in this official
position for sixteen years and was a Senior officer. In November of 2005, the
Acting Manager Director of the appellant’s company,informed him that some
employees of the company had been arrested and that the respondent should go to
the Police Station at Legon to give a statement to the Police. It turned out
that two mechanics who were employees of the company at East Legon filling
Station had been arrested. The respondent gave a statement to the Police and
reported later to the Police Station on subsequent days.<o:p></o:p>On the 1st of November 2005, the respondent was at work when
the Acting Managing Director of the appellant company handed a letter to him
which sought to suspend him as an Officer of the company. In the course of the
trial, this letter was tendered in evidence as Exhibit ‘B’.&nbsp; The reason canvassed in Exhibit ‘B’ for the
respondent’s suspension was that he had been implicated in the ongoing police
investigations. The respondent contended that the Police did not make any
adverse findings against him and did not charge him with any offence. It was
further contended by the respondent at no point in time did the appellant
company invite him to confront him with any allegations of impropriety before
he was suspended. The respondent’s Solicitor wrote to the appellant company to
reconsider the decision to suspend the respondent as according to the Solicitor,
the decision sinned against the basic rules of natural justice. The appellant
justified the decision to suspend the respondent.<o:p></o:p>Following the response from the appellant company, the respondent
caused the action herein to be commenced against the appellant seeking among
other reliefs a declaration that his suspension from the employment was null
and void and of no effect.<o:p></o:p>The matter proceeded to a full scale trial at the end of which the
learned trial Judge of the High Court, Accra made a determination in favour of
the respondent. The appellant, claiming to have been aggrieved by and dissatisfied
with the judgment of the trial court lodged an appeal there from to the Court
of Appeal. In its judgment, the Court of Appeal held that the appeal was
without merit and consequently dismissed same. The instant proceedings are as a
result of the exercise by the appellant of its statutory right to appeal to
this court from the decision of the Court of Appeal. In its appeal, the appellant
quite naturally seeks a reversal of the decision of the Court of Appeal in its
favour and in particular, an order dismissing the claims of the appellant as
formulated in the writ of summons herein.<o:p></o:p>Before us, the appellant has challenged the decision that is on appeal
on several grounds. In our view, since the action arises from a contract of
employment, the fundamental issue to be decided in the matter herein is whether
the letter of suspension earlier on referred to in the course of this judgment
was justified under the contract between the parties herein? This requires us
to examine the reasons contained in the said letter of 1 November 2005. Since
the appellant was the author of the said letter, it was incumbent upon it to
prove that the allegation on which the suspension was based was true.<o:p></o:p>Unfortunately, at the trial before the High Court, the appellant relied
only on bare allegations to sustain a charge which was in its nature criminal.
The appellant neither called the police who were alleged to be investigating
the complaint, nor the persons who had according to them, made statements that
implicated the respondent. The proceedings held in the course of the trial on
26 January 2007 that appears at page 136 of the record of appeal has the
following entry that we consider decisive against the appellant on the burden
of proof that it assumed having regard to its defence to the action herein.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; “BOADU: We have subpoenaed the IGP and served Hearing Notice on them &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; but they have not come to help us. We
cannot ask that they be arrested so we &nbsp;&nbsp; are
closing our case.<o:p></o:p>