ANTHONY EMMANUEL CRANKSON vs. THE NATIONAL DISASTER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION (NADMO) AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PER THE CHIEF STATE ATTORNEY [2013]DLCA8113

ANTHONY EMMANUEL CRANKSON vs. THE NATIONAL DISASTER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION (NAD... [2013]DLCA8113

Date	2013-06-27
Suit No.	SUIT NO. HI/ 13/2013
Citation No.	[2013]DLCA8113

HONYENUGA JA PRESIDING

ADJEI JA

ACKAH -YENSU JA

MRS MARY NSENKYIRE(SA) FOR THE (DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS)

AUGUSTINE AVAL MENSAH ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT

[2013]DLCA8113
																																						<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" >ANTHONY&nbsp;EMMANUEL&nbsp;CRANKSON<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE NATIONAL DISASTER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION&nbsp;(NADMO) AND
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PER THE CHIEF STATE ATTORNEY<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL,
CAPE COAST]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

SUIT
NO. HI/ 13/2013&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;DATE:
27TH JUNE, 2013<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MRS
MARY NSENKYIRE(SA) FOR THE (DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

AUGUSTINE
AVAL MENSAH ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

HONYENUGA
JA PRESIDING, ADJEI JA, ACKAH -YENSU JA<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>DENNIS ADJEI . JA: 
On 28th June, 2006 the High Court Sekondi dismissed the Plaintiff's claim as
endorsed&nbsp;on his writ of summons and entered judgment for the defendants on
their counterclaim. The Plaintiff dissatisfied&nbsp; with the judgment&nbsp; of
the trial High Court filed an appeal to this court. In this appeal the
Plaintiff /Appellant would be referred to as Plaintiff and the Defendants/
Respondents as Defendants.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>&nbsp;The brief facts of
the case culminating in this appeal were that the Plaintiff was an employee of
the 1st defendant and stationed at Takoradi. The 1st Defendant acquired a duty
post accommodation from Social Security National Insurance&nbsp;Trust (SSNIT)
and gave it to the Plaintiff to occupy in his capacity as an employee.&nbsp;
There was a tenancy agreement between&nbsp;SSNIT and the 1st defendant and the
premises &nbsp;was described in the tenancy
agreement as Flat No 2B on the ground floor of Block 1 Anaji. At a point in
time the Plaintiff asserted ownership to the duty post&nbsp;flat. His case was
that he negotiated for it but the policy governing the allocation of the flats
was that it was allocated to institutions and not individual employees and as a
result of that it was allocated in the name of his employer; the 1st defendant.
The 1st Defendant transferred the Plaintiff to its District Office at Jomoro in
the Western Region. The Plaintiff saw his transfer as unfair and unjust and
decided not to go to his new station. The Plaintiff did not receive his salary
for October, 2003. He made an investigation and found that an embargo had been
placed on his salary by the 1st defendant for having vacated his post. He
lodged&nbsp;a complaint against the&nbsp;1st defendant with Commission&nbsp;on
Human Rights and Administrative Justice&nbsp;(CHRAJ) at Takoradi. CHRAJ
investigated the case and found two of the plaintiff's reliefs as frivolous and
found the third relief for him. The two reliefs which were found to be
frivolous were that the&nbsp;Plaintiff was not a recognized tenant of the flat,
that is the subject matter of the 1st defendant's counterclaim and&nbsp;secondly,
the Plaintiff&nbsp;vacated his post and was not entitled to reinstatement. However,
the 1st defendant was directed to pay the Plaintiff's salary up to 29th&nbsp;January,
2004 based on the number of days he attended work from 1st November, 2003 to
29th January, 2004.<o:p></o:p> 
On 29th January, 2004 the 1st defendant terminated the Plaintiff’s employment. The
plaintiff took out a writ against the defendants challenging the basis of his
transfer and the termination. The trial High Court dismissed the plaintiff's
claim and granted the 1st&nbsp;Defendant’s counterclaim. The&nbsp;Plaintiff
dissatisfied with the judgment&nbsp;filed an appeal against same to this court.
The grounds of appeal set out by the Plaintiff are as follows:<o:p></o:p> 
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; "(a)The
judgment is against the weight of evidence &nbsp;&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; adduced at &nbsp;the trial.<o:p></o:p> 
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; (b) The learned trial judge erred in holding that
</main>