SHAFAWU MUSAH vs. AVIATION HANDLING SERVICES (GH) LTD. [2020]DLCA8572

Date	2020-02-06
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO.: H1/50/2019
Citation No.	[2020]DLCA8572

B. F. ACKAH-YENSU JA (PRESIDING)

I. O. TANKO AMADU JA

AMMA GAISIE JA

FORTUNATE K. B. FIU FOR APPELLANT

DAAD AKWASI WITH HER SHILEY OTOO AND LOIS NTERFUL FOR DEFENDANT/RESPT/RESPT

[2020]DLCA8572
																																						<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" >SHAFAWU MUSAH<o:p></o:p>(APPLICANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">vs.<o:p></o:p>AVIATION HANDLING SERVICES&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (GH) LTD.<o:p></o:p>(RESP/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

CIVIL APPEAL NO.: H1/50/2019&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 6TH FEB, 2020<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>FORTUNATE K. B. FIU FOR 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">

DAAD AKWASI WITH HER
SHILEY OTOO AND LOIS NTERFUL FOR DEFENDANT/RESPT/RESPT<o:p></o:p>

</div><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;
line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">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">

B. F. ACKAH-YENSU JA
(PRESIDING), I. O. TANKO AMADU JA, AMMA GAISIE JA<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <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" 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>B. ACKAH-YENSU, JA<o:p></o:p>INTRODUCTION<o:p></o:p>In
this appeal against the judgment of the High Court (Labour Division) dated 27th
March, 2018, the Applicant/Appellant (hereinafter to be referred to simply as
the “Appellant”) prays that the decision of the Court below be set aside and
judgment entered in her favour.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>BACKGROUND
FACTS<o:p></o:p>Appellant’s
Case<o:p></o:p>The
Appellant’s claim at the trial Court was that she was accused of extorting money
from an Arik Air passenger who had excess luggage.&nbsp; Her employer, the Respondent/Respondent (also
to be referred to simply as the “Respondent”), claimed that she was induced by
the payment of the money to check in the said passenger and her friend together
with the excess luggage, contrary to laid down procedures of the Airline and
Airport regulations.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
Appellant denied extorting any money as alleged by her employer, the Respondent.&nbsp; It is her case that based on the allegations
against her, she was queried, subsequently charged and put before a
Disciplinary Committee as required by her contract of employment.&nbsp; At the hearing however, Appellant’s attempt
to be represented by her lawyer was rejected, even though she insisted that she
had the right under law to be so represented.&nbsp;
The Respondent called off the hearing, contending that the Appellant
could not attend the disciplinary hearing with her lawyer.&nbsp; Appellant was subsequently invited to appear
before the Disciplinary Committee for a second time but the hearing was again
called off because she attended with her lawyer.&nbsp; Appellant’s appointment was consequently terminated.&nbsp; She is therefore claiming that the
termination of her contract of employment was unlawful and in breach of her
constitutional rights.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Respondent’s
Case<o:p></o:p>Respondent,
on the other hand, contended that the Appellant was engaged in an unlawful act
of extortion and also carried out her duties in a manner that breached their
rules of operation and Airport regulations.&nbsp;
They therefore had no option but to subject the Appellant to
disciplinary proceedings as required by her contract of employment.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>When
there was disagreement as to whether the Appellant could appear before the
Disciplinary Committee with her lawyer or to be represented by a Union member,
the Appellant chose to appear before the Committee with her lawyer.&nbsp; Not happy with the stance of the Appellant,
the Respondent called off the disciplinary proceedings and terminated the
employment of the Appellant.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>