MANFORD GYANSA-LUTTERODT v. AFAM CONCEPT
March 20, 2022
SUPREME COURT
CORAM
- OWUSU J.S.C., (PRESIDING), AMADU J.S.C, KOOMSON J.S.C., KWOFIE J.S.C., DARKO ASARE J.S.C
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Administrative Law
- Employment Law
March 20, 2022
SUPREME COURT
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Darko Asare JSC, the Supreme Court of Ghana dismissed an appeal challenging the Court of Appeal’s refusal to extend time for an appeal from a National Labour Commission decision. The appellant argued that Rule 9 of the Court of Appeal Rules (C.I. 19) empowered the Court of Appeal to extend time even for appeals from statutory bodies, and cited David Brown v National Labour Commission and In Re GPRTU to support judicial intervention where legislation is silent. The respondents contended that by proceeding before the NLC, the appellant was bound by the Labour Act (Act 651), which contains no extension power. The Supreme Court raised sua sponte a preliminary jurisdictional question and held that because the matter did not originate from the High Court’s original jurisdiction, Article 131(2) of the Constitution and section 4(2) of the Courts Act required prior leave or special leave. As no leave was obtained, the Court’s jurisdiction was not properly invoked, and it declined to reach the merits, dismissing the appeal as incompetent.
DARKO ASARE JSC:
This appeal raises a point of practice and procedure of some critical importance and we therefore think it necessary to set out the full history of the proceedings that have culminated in this appeal.
The Appellant herein lodged a Petition against the Respondents, his former employers at the National Labour Commission over an allegation of unfair termination and sought a number of reliefs. The National Labour Commission delivered its decision in respect of the said Petition on the 17th
of November 2020. Contending that the said decision was only made available to him on the 15th of December 2020, after the expiration of the fourteen day period allowed for lodging appeals against such decisions, the aggrieved Appellant filed an application dated the 24th of December 2020, seeking the leave of the Court of Appeal for an extension of time within which to appeal against the said decision.
On the 10th day of February 2021, the Court of Appeal delivered its Ruling refusing the Appellant’s application for extension of time to appeal, on the grounds, mainly that the Court had no jurisdiction to grant an extension of time to lodge an appeal against decisions emanating from the National Labour Commission. The learned Justices of Appeal reasoned that their hands were tied, since unlike appeals against decisions emanating from the traditional court system, the Court of Appeal had no power under the Labour Act, 2003, Act 651 to extend time.
It is the above conclusion by the Court of Appeal, that the Appellant assails by this instant appeal. He invites us to say that the basis for the learned
Justices of Appeal’s decision was ill-founded and entirely erroneous. He formulated a sole ground of appeal, to wit:-
GROUND OF APPEAL
1. The Honourable Court erred in law when it ruled that the Court does not have the jurisdiction to extend the time within which to appeal against a decision from the National Labour Commission.
PARTICULARS OF ERRORS
i) The jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal to extend time to appeal is founded under Rule 9 of the Court of Appeal Rules, C.I. 19
ii) The decision of the Court declining jurisdiction sins against Rule 9 of C.I. 19
The refusal of the Court of Appeal to extend time for the Complainant/Applicant/Appellant to appeal is manifestly unjust and contrary to the duty of the Court to do justice to Parties.
Arguments by learned Counsel
At this re-hearing, learned Counsel for the Appellant contests the decision of the