AMBROSE DOTSE KLAH v. PHOENIX INSURANCE CO
2012
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- DATE-BAH JSC (PRESIDING)
- ANSAH JSC
- DOTSE JSC
- BONNIE JSC
- AKOTO-BAMFO(MRS) JSC
Areas of Law
- Employment Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
2012
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Supreme Court of Ghana, per Akoto-Bamfo JSC, dismissed Ambrose Dotse Klahs appeal against the Court of Appeals reversal of a severance and other benefits award of GH2701,128,000 previously granted by the High Court against Phoenix Insurance Company. Klah had been summarily dismissed from his role as Chief Accountant by letter (Exhibit A) that also stated he would lose all benefits. On appeal, he argued that the Court of Appeal let technicalities override substantive justice and that his severance claim was unchallenged. The Supreme Court held that pleadings are not evidence; because Phoenix specifically denied the severance averment, Klah bore the burden to prove it and did not. Relying on established authorities, the Court found no evidence supporting the severance figure, distinguished general from special damages, and reiterated wrongful dismissal damages principles, including mitigation. The appeal was accordingly dismissed; the separate general damages award affirmed by the Court of Appeal was not before the Supreme Court.
AKOTO-BAMFO (MRS) JSC:
It is important to stress that the efficient conduct of a case includes the drafting of correct pleadings, the marshaling and adducing of the relevant evidence during the trial and the invocation of the correct principles of law. These are well-known basics. If counsel falls short in any of these areas, it may lead to failure of the action he or she has initiated or, correspondingly, success of an action he or she is defending. In such a situation, it is no use for counsel to turn around and blame the court for allowing technicalities to frustrate its primary and important function of justice. Courts do justice according to law. Accordingly, counsel cannot afford to take their eyes off the details of the law. This case is a classic example of counsel paying insufficient attention to detail resulting in the inevitable loss of the claim which is the subject of this inattention.
On the 30th of June 2009, the appellant herein, Ambrose Dotse Klah, filed a Notice of Appeal in the Registry of this court by which process he served notice that he was dissatisfied with the Judgment of the court of Appeal dated the 18th of December 2008.According to him the object of his dissatisfaction was:
“The part of the judgment which set aside the award of “severance and other awards”
These were his grounds of appeal:
The Court of Appeal erred in setting aside the award of severance award and other benefits having confirmed that the appeal was wrongfully dismissed.
The Court of Appeal failed in its duty to do justice to the applicant when it failed to
invoke its general powers to protect the applicant.
The Court of Appeal should have exercised the discretion to order the payment of
Severance awards having found that the
Defendant/Appellant/Respondent severed
the employment relationship.
The Court of Appeal erred in requiring the Plaintiff/Respondent/Appellant to lead
exhaustive and elaborate evidence on his “severance and other
awards [benefits]”
when what he claimed to be due him was not challenged.
Additional grounds of appeal may be filed upon receipt of the record of proceedings.
Even though there was an indication that additional grounds would be filed; no such grounds were filed.
In order to appreciate the issues raised, it is necessary to set out briefly the events culminating in to the present appeal.
BACKGROUND
Until the 5th day of March 2005, the appellant was the Chief Accountant of the Phoenix Insurance Company, the respo