DR. JOSEPH ASARE vs JAYEE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE

On 13th July, 2020, the Plaintiff herein commenced legal action against the Defendant and sought the following reliefs; a. An order for the recovery of the sum of GH¢72, 808. 52 being salary arrears Defendant owes Plaintiff.

b. Interest on the said sum at the prevailing lending bank rate from May, 2020 till date of final payment.

c. Cost, including lawyer’s fees.

The Defendant after a long while entered appearance and filed its Defence.

At the application for directions, the issues adopted for trial were a. Whether or not the Defendant owes the Plaintiff in salary arrears to the tune of GH¢72, 808. 52 and b. Whether or not the Plaintiff vacated post. After filling its Witness Statement, the Defendant failed to participate in the trial despite numerous hearing notices served on it or its lawyer by the Plaintiff.

Eventually the case was heard in the absence of the Defendant.

The case of the Plaintiff is quite simple and devoid of any complexities.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant on 23rd June, 2016 as a lecturer and head of the secretaryship and management unit of the Defendant institution.

Plaintiff’s remuneration and other conditions of service were contained in his letter of appointment.

It is Plaintiff’s case that since his employment, Defendant has not been paying his salary regularly and as at May, 2020, the Defendant owed Plaintiff an amount of GH¢88, 009. 23 out of which Defendant paid GH¢15, 300. 71 leaving an outstanding balance of GH¢72, 808. 52. The case of the Defendant however as pleaded in its statement of Defence is that the Plaintiff vacated post after only two months of service.

As indicated Defendant failed to attend the trial and so Plaintiff gave evidence per his Witness Statement and also and tendered some exhibits marked Exhibits A to P. Before I proceed to analyze the evidence adduced by the Plaintiff in support of his statement of fact, I wish to refer to the law and consider the burden of proof in civil cases.

The general principle of law has been captured in the proposition “he who asserts must proof”. This proposition of law was restated in the case of ZABRAMA VRS SEGBEDZIE (1991) 2GLR 221 at P 226 where KPEGA JA ( as he then was) said; “ A person who makes an averment or assertion which is denied by the opponent has the burden to establish that the assertion is true.

And he does not discharge that burden, unless he leads admissible and credible evidence from which the fact or facts he asserts can properly a