EMMANUEL KODZO DUMENU & ORS vs. THE MINISTRY OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE & ANOR [2018]DLHC9318

Date	2018-05-30
Suit No.	SUIT NO. RPC 17/2016
Citation No.	[2018]DLHC9318

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE

KOFI OWUSU SEKYERE FOR KOFI ADDO FOR THE PLAINTIFFS

FAIZAL ABDUL SAMAD FOR THE DEFENDANTS

[2018]DLHC9318
																																						<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" >EMMANUEL
KODZO DUMENU &amp; ORS<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE
MINISTRY OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE &amp; ANOR<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, KUMASI]<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">

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>KOFI OWUSU SEKYERE FOR KOFI ADDO FOR
THE PLAINTIFFS <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">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:normal;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">FAIZAL
ABDUL SAMAD FOR THE DEFENDANTS <o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HIS
LORDSHIP JUSTICE DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE<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="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:normal;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">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>The
plaintiffs by their Writ of Summons filed on the 25/10/2015 claim against the
defendants jointly and severally as follows:<o:p></o:p>a)A
declaration that upon the end of their contracts with the 1st defendant, each
of the plaintiffs was entitled to receive an end of contract benefit
(EX-GRATIA) commensurate with his\her rank and salary.<o:p></o:p>b)A
declaration that the failure\refusal by the 1st defendant to pay the plaintiffs
such end of contracts benefit (EX-GRATIA) is an infringement on the plaintiff’s
fundamental human rights as enshrined in the 1992 constitution.<o:p></o:p>c)An
order compelling the defendants to promptly pay each of the plaintiffs the
total sum as set down on the schedule ’A’ attached to the Writ of Summons being
4 months’ salary for each year the respective plaintiff has worked with the 1st
defendant.<o:p></o:p>d)Interest
on the said sum from 1st September,2010 till date of payment at a prevailing
commercial bank lending rate.<o:p></o:p>e)An
order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1st defendant from ejecting any
of the plaintiffs from or interfering with their quite enjoyment of the duty
post bungalows\premises they occupy until the final determination of this suit
or the payment of their entitlements.<o:p></o:p>f)Any
order as the courts may deem fit.<o:p></o:p>The
defendants caused an appearance to be entered on their behalf on 19/11/2015.
The Defendants also filed their statement of defense to the claim on
17/12/2015. They subsequently filed an amended statement of defense on the
24/05/2017. <o:p></o:p>The
Defendants also counterclaimed against the Plaintiffs for:<o:p></o:p>1.
A declaration that the continued occupation by the Plaintiffs of the 1st
Defendant’s buildings at Asuoyeboah and Buokrom after determination of their
contract in June 2010 is unlawful and illegal.<o:p></o:p>2.
An order for the ejection and recovery and possession of the 1st
Defendant’s building at Buokrom and Asuoyeboah.<o:p></o:p>3.An
order for the payment of mesne profit by the plaintiffs to the 1stDefendant’s
from September 2010 to date of payment.<o:p></o:p>4.
An order for replacement of fixtures and fittings.<o:p></o:p>5.
General damages.<o:p></o:p>After
an unsuccessful attempt at settlement the following issues were set down for
trial by the court:<o:p></o:p>1.
Whether or not per the condition of service the plaintiffs were entitled to
ex-gratia or end of service benefit.<o:p></o:p>2.
Whether or not the plaintiffs are entitled to any end of service benefit by
virtue of work they did after the end of the first phase of the project.<o:p></o:p>3.
Whether or not plaintiffs did perform any duty for the benefit of the
defendants after the end of the first phase of the project.<o:p></o:p>4.
Whether or not the plaintiffs are entitled to their claims.<o:p></o:p>5.
Whether or not the defendants are entitled to their counter-claims.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiffs’ case is that they were contracted by the 1stdefendant to
work on a project known as the Small Holder Credit Input Supply and Marketing
project (herein referred to as SCIMP). The project was a collaboration between
the Government of Ghana and the International Fund for Agricultural Development
(herein referred to as IFAD). </main>