SAMUEL METTLE NUNOO VS ELECTRICITY COMPANY OF GHANA
2015
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- SIR DENNIS ADJEI J. A,
Areas of Law
- Employment Law
2015
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The plaintiff, a former employee of the defendant, challenged his dismissal on grounds of alleged involvement in an illegal transfer of a customer's account and unauthorized sale of a company meter. Following unsuccessful attempts to overturn the dismissal through the employer's internal channels and the Commission of Human Rights and Administrative Justice, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking various reliefs including reinstatement and damages. The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove that his dismissal was wrongful and dismissed the case. Legal principles from previous cases and statutes were referred to, emphasizing the burden of proof in civil cases and the difference between termination and dismissal.
The plaintiff, a former employee of the defendant who was dismissed by its employer and was dissatisfied with his dismissal sued the defendant for the following reliefs: (a) A declaration that plaintiff’s dismissal was unlawful since he has not committed any offence that warrants the dismissal.
b) An order for payments of plaintiff’s salaries from December, 5 2007 up and till the final determination of the suit.
c) An order for the reinstatement of the plaintiff or in the alternative the payment of the total entitlement upon due retirement.
d) Damages for the unlawful dismissal of the plaintiff from the defendant’s employment.
e) Costs (f) And other reliefs as this court may seem fit”. The brief facts of the plaintiff’s case were that he was an employee of the defendant and was employed by the defendant on 3rd March, 2002. On 14th March, 2007 the plaintiff and one Abdul Kassim were served with query letters for their alleged involvement of the illegal transfer of an Electricity Company of Ghana customer’s account.
The plaintiff in his response to the query denied having done any wrong.
A committee was set up to investigate the plaintiff after which he was found culpable and was subsequently dismissed.
The plaintiff made several attempts for his dismissal letter to be withdrawn but proved futile.
The plaintiff initially petitioned the General Manager of the defendant but he did not reply.
He further engaged a labour consultant to negotiate for his reinstatement but could not yield as positive results.
He further went to the Commission of Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) but it could not persuade the defendant to reinstate him.
He therefore as a last resort instituted this action against the defendant.
The defendant on its part averred that the plaintiff was involved in an illegal transaction and after a committee was set up to investigate him, the committee found him liable for having sold a 3 phase-meter to Emmanuel Odu for the sum of GH₵50. 00 which was illegal and brought the name of the defendant’s Company into dispute.
The Committee further found that the plaintiff admitted having benefitted from the said illegal transaction.
According to the defendant the plaintiff admitted before the committee that although the illegal transfer of the meter did not involve the 3-phase meter to one Emmanuel Odu who was described as his accomplice and received GH₵50. 00 in return; at the application for directions stage the following issues