SAMUEL EDEM BUAKAH OF AFLAO vs. GHANA POST COMPANY LTD HEADQUARTERS [2018]DLHC4073

Date	2018-05-15
Suit No.	SUIT NO. E2/30/14
Citation No.	[2018]DLHC4073

ERIC BAAH JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

GODWIN KPOBLE FOR PLAINTIFF PRESENT

AGYENIM BOATENG FOR DEFENDANT ABSENT

[2018]DLHC4073
																																						<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" >SAMUEL EDEM BUAKAH OF
AFLAO<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>GHANA POST COMPANY LTD
HEADQUARTERS<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, HO]<o:p></o:p>SUIT
NO. E2/30/14&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;15TH
MAY 2018 <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>GODWIN
KPOBLE FOR PLAINTIFF PRESENT <o:p></o:p>AGYENIM BOATENG FOR
DEFENDANT ABSENT <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt">

</div>Per
his writ of summons issued on 25 February, 2014,
the plaintiff seeks a declaration that the defendant failed to comply with
their Collective Bargaining Agreement (C.B.A.) and therefore could not dismiss
him; a declaration that his dismissal was unlawful, illegal, null and void and
of no legal effect; an order for the payment of all salaries, emoluments,
entitlements and benefits due him effective 9 December 2011; an order
reinstating him, general damages for unlawful dismissal and punitive costs. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>After
the pleadings and application for direction, the court ordered the parties to
file their witness statements. The plaintiff duly filed his witness statement
but the defendant failed or refused to do so. The plaintiff's witness statement
was served on the defendant. Thereafter, a hearing notice was
served on the defendant to appear in court. They failed to do so without any excuse
of justification. <o:p></o:p>REKV TRAN HIGH COUAT HO
<o:p></o:p>The
court conducted the case management conference in the absence of the defendant.
With leave of the court, the plaintiff testified by relying on his witness
statement. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In
the course of the trial, the plaintiff's counsel intimated that the defendant
had re-instated the plaintiff. This fact was re-iterated in the written address
of plaintiff counsel. The issue of re-instatement of the plaintiff is
accordingly no more at stake. The other issues are however at state.
In order to determine those issues, it is necessary for the court to consider
the legality or otherwise of the plaintiff's suspension. At
the close of the case for the plaintiff, his lawyer filed a written address as
directed by the court. <o:p></o:p>