FREDERICK WARIBANKAARA vs. NOTRE DAME SEMINARY SEC. SCHOOL [2016]DLCA7975

Date	2016-04-13
Suit No.	SUIT NO: H1/06/2014
Citation No.	[2016]DLCA7975

ADJEI JA – PRESIDING

LOVELACE-JOHNSON JA

ACKAH-YENSU JA

SHAIBU WUMPINI ESQ.FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT

RAYMOND BUGUABI ESQ. FOR THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

[2016]DLCA7975
																																						<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" >FREDERICK WARIBANKAARA<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF / APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NOTRE DAME SEMINARY SEC. SCHOOL<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT / RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL,
TAMALE]<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: H1/06/2014&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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:13th
APRIL, 2016<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>SHAIBU WUMPINI
ESQ.FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT <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">

RAYMOND
BUGUABI ESQ.&nbsp; FOR THE
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT <o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>ADJEI JA – PRESIDING, LOVELACE-JOHNSON
JA, ACKAH-YENSU 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 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:150%;
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">JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>ADJEI,
J.A:<o:p></o:p>On
23rd March, 2012, the High Court Bolgatanga dismissed all the
reliefs endorsed on the Plaintiff/Appellant’s writ of summons filed on 4th
July, 2007 as unproven. For brevity, the Plaintiff/Appellant and the
Defendants/Respondents will be referred to in this appeal as Plaintiff and
Defendants respectively. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the judgment of the
High Court Bolgatanga which dismissed his claim filed a notice of appeal
against the judgment on 19th June, 2012. The Notice of Appeal
contained only the omnibus ground of appeal; that is the judgment is against
the weight of evidence on record. On 2nd June, this Court granted
leave to the Plaintiff to file five additional grounds of appeal. The additional
grounds of appeal were filed on 17th June, 2015. The five additional
grounds of appeal are as follows:<o:p></o:p>“a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The trial Court erred when it relied&nbsp; on the&nbsp;
Report&nbsp; on the supposed&nbsp; proceedings of the&nbsp; School Disciplinary Committee to dismiss all
the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff and which Committee lacked jurisdiction as
same was not&nbsp; properly constituted.<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The trial Court erred when it admitted into evidence the
Report on the proceedings of the Disciplinary Committee instead of the&nbsp; ACTUAL PROCEEDINGS&nbsp; at the&nbsp;
Committee’s sitting; and&nbsp; which
Deport itself&nbsp; was void in law for want
of jurisdiction.<o:p></o:p>c.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The whole proceedings of the Disciplinary Committee was void
as same was in clear violation of natural justice and statutory procedural
rules regarding fair trial.<o:p></o:p>d.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Honourable trial Court erred when it failed to
consider&nbsp; the fatal effect on the
Defendant’s&nbsp; case&nbsp; of the&nbsp;
refusal/failure to make available Jonas Baba, a vital witness to their
case to be cross-examined by the Plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>e.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Honourable trial Court when it misdirected itself in
respect of circumstantial evidence and substituted suspicions and possibilities
arrived at by the Disciplinary Committee for Judicial evidence and which formed
the basis of the Court’s judgment”.<o:p></o:p>The
brief facts of the case before this Court were that the Plaintiff who was a
third year student of the 1st Defendant’s school was suspended indefinitely for
having stolen money belonging to another student. The Plaintiff contended that
he was not given a fair hearing by the Committee constituted to investigate his
case which found him culpable for stealing. <o:p></o:p>The
Plaintiff was of the opinion that the Code of Conduct issued by the Ghana
Education Service to regulate the conduct of students in Secondary Schools in
Ghana provides suspension for a person found liable for stealing and the
indefinite suspension imposed on him was a dismissal from the school in
disguise and same contrary to the said Code of Conduct. It will be significant
to quote the endorsement on the writ of Summons to disclose the new matters
introduced by the Plaintiff in his written submission which were not part of
his case and not discussed at the trial. The reliefs sought by the Plaintiff
are as follows:<o:p></o:p>“a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A declaration that the dismissal of the Plaintiff disguised in
indefinite suspension was wrong in law and therefore null and void.<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the purported trial of the Plaintiff by the
Disciplinary committee of the School was not fair.<o:p></o:p>c.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; General damages of ¢500,000,000.00 for Plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>d.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Special damages of ¢608,000.00 being fees paid by the
Plaintiff without benefit.<o:p></o:p>