JAMES DAVID BROWN vs. NATIONAL LABOUR COMMISSION AND AHANTAMAN RURAL BANK LTD. [2018]DLCA4935

Date	2018-03-01
Suit No.	SUIT NO: 1L/0116/2017
Citation No.	[2018]DLCA4935

MARFUL-SAU J.A.(PRESIDING)

ADJEI J.A.

MRS SOWAH J.A.

DAVID OWUSU TACHIE ESQ. FOR THE 2ND RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

COMPLAINANT/APPELLANT IN PERSON

[2018]DLCA4935
																																						<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" >JAMES DAVID BROWN<o:p></o:p>(COMPLAINANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NATIONAL
LABOUR COMMISSION AND AHANTAMAN RURAL BANK LTD.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

SUIT
NO: 1L/0116/2017&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: 1ST MARCH, 2018<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>DAVID OWUSU TACHIE
ESQ. FOR THE 2ND RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT<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">

COMPLAINANT/APPELLANT
IN PERSON<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">

MARFUL-SAU
J.A.(PRESIDING), ADJEI J.A., MRS SOWAH J.A.<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">

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

</div>DENNIS D. ADJEI
(JA)<o:p></o:p>The Complainant
/Appellant herein was an employee of the 2nd Defendant/Respondent.
The 2nd Defendant/Respondent on 29th June, 2016
terminated the Complainant’s appointment for gross misconduct and was paid one month’s
salary in lieu of notice in accordance with their Collective Agreement. The Complainant
dissatisfied with the grounds upon which his appointment was terminated
appealed to the 1st Defendant/Respondent for redress. The 1st
Respondent heard the appeal and came to the&nbsp;
conclusion that the&nbsp; Complainant’s
appointment was unfairly terminated by the 2nd Respondent. The 1st
Respondent set aside the award of one month salary in lieu of notice for
termination of appointment and substituted three month’s salary as compensation
for unfair termination.<o:p></o:p>The Complainant dissatisfied
with the decision rendered by the&nbsp; 1st
Defendant/Respondent on 20th September,2017 appealed&nbsp; to this Court to vary the compensation awarded
by the 1st Respondent and substitute appropriate compensation&nbsp; for unfair&nbsp;
termination&nbsp; of his appointment by
the&nbsp; 2nd Respondent/Respondent.<o:p></o:p>The grounds of appeal
filed by the Complainant are as follows:<o:p></o:p>“1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The
Commission erred in law when held that the Employer/Respondent Bank had already
paid the complainant/appellant.<o:p></o:p>ii.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The
ruling/decision is against the weight of evidence”.<o:p></o:p>The parties subsequently
filed their&nbsp; respective written
submissions in accordance with law.<o:p></o:p>We examine the
jurisdiction of this Court to&nbsp;&nbsp; entertain
an appeal from a&nbsp; decision&nbsp; of the Labour Commission in respect of unfair
termination and the consequential orders made under it. Jurisdiction of a court
means the power of the Court to adjudicate. Every jurisdiction is created by
either the Constitution or Statute and, therefore, where jurisdiction has not been
created by the Constitution or a statute, a court of law cannot assume it. Jurisdiction
may exist in the form of original, appellate, supervisory or review and&nbsp; must be expressly conferred on a Court or body
before that Court or body &nbsp;can exercise
it. The Labour Act, 2003(Act 651) confers one jurisdiction on the Court of
Appeal, that is an appeal against a decision made by the Labour Commission
regarding the determination of complaints of unfair labour practices. Section
132,133 and 134 of the Labour Act 2003(Act 651) provide thus:<o:p></o:p>“132. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The
Commission shall enquire into and determine complaints of unfair Labour
practices brought before it in accordance with its procedure”.<o:p></o:p>133(1)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Where
the Commission finds that a person has engaged in an unfair labour practice, it
may make an order forbidding that person to engage or continue to engage in the
activities specified in the order<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb</main>