PETER BENNET YARQUAH vs. UNIVERSITY OF GHANA [2023]DLNLC17176

Date	2023-11-10
Suit No.
Citation No.	[2023]DLNLC17176

JUSTICE KWABENA ASUMAN-ADU (RTD.) (CHAIRMAN)

[2023]DLNLC17176
																																						<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" >PETER BENNET YARQUAH<o:p></o:p>

vs.<o:p></o:p>

UNIVERSITY OF GHANA<o:p></o:p>

[NLC]<o:p></o:p>

Our Ref:
NLC/C-383/022/2023/34 4&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;10TH
NOVEMBER&nbsp; 2023<o:p></o:p>

</div>

FOR THE COMMISSION: <o:p></o:p>

JUSTICE KWABENA
ASUMAN-ADU (RTD.)&nbsp; (CHAIRMAN)<o:p></o:p>

</div>

&nbsp;

RULING ON PRELIMINARY LEGAL
OBJECTION<o:p></o:p>

</div>

&nbsp;

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE <o:p></o:p>

This ruling is on the basis of a
preliminary legal objection to jurisdiction filed by the Respondent in this
matter. The Respondent’s case is that the Commission does not have jurisdiction
to determine the instant complaint. It is trite that once the issue of
jurisdiction of a tribunal is raised in any matter, the adjudicating body ought
to deal with the issue since it has the potential of disposing off the whole
matter and save the parties time and expense. <o:p></o:p>

The Commission would like to briefly
state the facts that have precipitated this instant complaint before addressing
the jurisdictional issue raised by the respondent.<o:p></o:p>

COMPLAINANT’S CASE<o:p></o:p>

By a complaint filed with the Commission
on 16 February 2023, Peter Bennet Yarquah (Complainant) claims that
the university of Ghana (Respondent) varied the terms and conditions of service
of his employment contract without his consent and contrary to the Complainants
rights and the Respondent’s own Human Resource Policy.<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:
0cm;margin-left:63.8pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:
justify;text-indent:-18.0pt;line-height:115%;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo1">1.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The Complainant says that in
August 2011, he was appointed as a college Registrar at the grade of SM1.
However, as a result of the implementation of the Single Spine Salary Structure
(SSSS) in 2013 the Respondent unilaterally downgraded the Complainant to the
level of Deputy Registrar grade SM2 without any communication to him in
relation to the change in status.<o:p></o:p>

&nbsp;

<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:
0cm;margin-left:63.8pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:
justify;text-indent:-18.0pt;line-height:115%;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo1">2.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The Complainant contends
that by virtue of a letter dated August 211, he acquired certain vested rights
that ought to subsist irrespective of the reforms as alleged by the Respondent.
The complainant says he wrote to the Respondent to seek redress on the issue
raised above but the Respondent failed and/or refused to effect the necessary
changes in the calculation of his benefits.<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:63.8pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;
text-align:justify;text-indent:-18.0pt;line-height:115%;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo1">3.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The Complainant being
dissatisfied with the position of the Respondent filed a&nbsp; complaint with the Commission in2018. The
Respondent responded and informed the Commission that the complaint is
premature since the Complainant had not exhausted the internal mechanism of the
University&nbsp; Appeals Board (UAB) of the
Respondent for redress prior to filing the complaint.<o:p></o:p>

&nbsp;