LAWRENCE Y. A. OSEI v. MECHANICAL LLOYD LTD.

DENNIS D. ADJEI (JA)

This appeal is against the judgment of the High Court, Accra, which on 18th December 2009, entered judgment for the Plaintiff against the defendant for all the reliefs endorsed on the plaintiff’s writ of summons. The reliefs were as follows: -

a) A declaration that the interdiction of the Plaintiff by the defendant without pay with effect from 27th October, 1997 is unlawful.

b) A declaration that the removal of the plaintiff’s name from the defendant’s payroll with effect from 27th October, 1997 amounts to unlawful dismissal.

c) An order for the recovery of all the emoluments due and payable to the plaintiff from October 1997 to the date of judgment on the salary scale applicable to the plaintiff.

d) Interest on relief (c) with effect from October 1997 to the date of payment.

e) That the Plaintiff be paid his monthly salary at the current rate for two (2) years in general damages.

The brief facts of the case were that the Plaintiff was an employee in the defendant’s company as an accountant. He was employed by the defendant on 1st November, 1989. On 27th October 1997, the defendant interdicted the plaintiff on the ground that certain anomalies were uncovered in the company’s accounts and as a result of that the Police invited the plaintiff to assist in the investigation into the accounts. The interdiction was without pay and was to take effect from 27th October 1997. The letter of interdiction was written by one Yaw Assah – Sam, General Manager and Resource Planning Officer of the defendant company. The Plaintiff became aggrieved and instituted an action against the defendant that his interdiction is in conflict with the Collective Agreement, which is the contract between the defendant and its senior staff of which the plaintiff was a member. After the plaintiff had instituted this present action against the defendant, the defendant wrote a dismissal letter to take retroactive effect from the date the plaintiff was interdicted.

On 10th February, 2010, the defendant filed seven (7) grounds of appeal. The defendant gave an indication that he may file additional grounds of appeal but did not file. The grounds of appeal are as follows: -

i. In the face of the evidence provided by the defendant particularly in exhibits 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 which clearly established that the plaintiff was guilty of massive fraud and embezzlement resulting in huge financial losses to his employers the learned trial judge erred in finding that the allegat