JOHN TAGOE v. ACCRA BREWERY LTD.

JUDGMENT

AYEBI J.A.

Until 2nd August 2007, the plaintiff (now respondent) was for the past 36 years an employee of the defendant (now appellant). Immediately before the cessation of plaintiff’s employment, he was the driver in charge of vehicle No. GT 4598 X with which he transports defendant’s products to various parts of the country.

On 10th July 2007, the plaintiff was to as usual go to Tamale with the products of defendant. For a round trip, his vehicle was supplied with 950 litres of diesel. Plaintiff drove the vehicle to defendant’s fuel station to be filled. According to the plaintiff, when the fuel tank of the vehicle was filled with 940 litres, he asked that the remaining 10 litres be put into a jerry-can. This is because when the tank is filled to the brim, the fuel spills on the bumpy and rough sections of the road.

The request was not acceded to by the fuel station attendant, Maxwell Nkansah. A struggle ensued between the two over the fuel gun and or the jerry-can as a result of which the fuel spilled on the ground. Plaintiff said on his return from Tamale, his Transport Manager informed him that Maxwell Nkansah has lodged a complaint of assault against him. He submitted a statement on the incident. A Disciplinary Committee constituted by management gave them a hearing. Witnesses were also heard. The witnesses corroborated his denial that he assaulted Maxwell Nkansah.

But then he was served with a letter of termination of his appointment because the Disciplinary Committee found him guilty of the charge of assault. He took advantage of the appeal process and appealed against the termination of his employment. However, the appeal Committee confirmed/upheld his termination.

The plaintiff contending that his termination was wrongful and contrary to the Collective Agreement dated 1st April 2006 between him as an employee and defendant as an employer, launched this action. Thus by an amended writ of summons, the plaintiff claims against the defendant:

“general damages for wrongful termination of appointment which damages include but not limited to salary, social security contributions, allowances and entitlements from the date of termination of appointment of employment”.

The response of the defendant is that although the direct and reserve tank of the vehicle was full, plaintiff made a calculated attempt to appropriate the resources of the defendant. The evaluation of the evidence before the Disciplinary Committee showed that plaintiff assau