OHENEBA BEDIAKO ESSUMAN v. THE CHURCH OF PENTECOST
2015
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- M. AGYEMANG (MRS) JA - SINGLE JUDGE
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Employment Law
- Evidence Law
2015
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This ruling concerns an application for a stay of execution pending an appeal to the Supreme Court, following a High Court judgment affirmed by this court. The applicant feared that if the judgment debt was allowed to go into execution, it might be impossible to recover the funds should the appeal succeed. The respondent opposed the application, alleging bad faith and asserting financial stability. The court granted the stay of execution based on principles including not depriving the successful party of their judgment benefits unless necessary, ensuring a successful appeal is not rendered nugatory, and the significance of the legal question on appeal. Applications for stays must be brought initially to the affirming court, per procedural rules.
This is a ruling in respect of an application for a stay of execution pending appeal of the judgment of this court (affirming that of the court below), to the Supreme Court.
The application is supported by a nineteen-paragraph affidavit deposed to by Sarpong-Kumankoma, Human Resource Manager of the church who deposed that he had the authority of the applicant so to do and furthermore, that the facts as deposed were within his knowledge and belief.
The deponent averred that the present application was seeking to stay execution of the judgment of the High Court Accra of 28th March 2013 Coram: Dekyem J, as affirmed by this court in its judgment of the 24th of June 2015.
According to the deponent, being aggrieved by the said judgment of this court that dismissed the applicant’s appeal, a further appeal has been lodged at the Supreme Court, hence the present application.
The deponent averred that the main question for the determination of the Supreme Court was whether the High Court and this court were right to order the applicant to apply Ghana Health Service Consolidated Salary structure in calculating the terminal benefits paid to the plaintiff respondent, in face of the courts’ finding that the applicant’s conditions of service was binding between the parties. He further deposed that the judgment debt continued to attract interest and that while the judgment debt itself was an amount of GHC26,917.32, accrued interest had brought it to the sum of GHC98,405.45, which sum had been paid into court. Since the judgment of the court decreed the accruing of interest until the date of payment, the further appeal being sought would cause further accrual of interest. According to the deponent, the appeal before the Supreme Court aimed at clearing “the confusion and blunder” that beset both the High Court and this court in the determination of the question, had a high chance of success but would be rendered nugatory as the respondent who was not in gainful employment would not be able to refund the monies if permitted to go into execution.
In a strongly-worded opposing affidavit, the deponent thereto, Eric Asuman-Adu of counsel who alleged bad faith in the appellant, denied that the High Court and this court had been involved in any “confusion and blunder”, and deposed that the judgment of the High Court as confirmed by this court fully appreciated the matters and correctly dealt with them seeing that the applicant was at all material times on Ghana Health Service