VOLTA RIVER AUTHORITY v. BENEDICT ATTA FYNN
2015
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- E. K. Ayebi (Presiding) JA
- Irene C. Larbi, (Mrs.) JA
- Angelina Mensah-Homiah (Mrs.), J
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Employment Law
2015
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The appeal contested the Sunyani High Court ruling on the plaintiff's ability to claim wrongful dismissal despite a prior judgment on related issues. The defendant asserted that the plaintiff was estopped due to prior litigation. The High Court's judgment, which was upheld, found that the issue of wrongful dismissal was not resolved by the prior court and thus did not preclude the current claim. Procedural issues regarding the specificity of appeal grounds were highlighted, affirming that lack of particulars renders such grounds inadmissible. The appellate court also differentiated between various forms of estoppel and upheld the principles ensuring finality in litigation to avoid abuse of the legal process.
YEBI, J. A:
1. This is an appeal against the ruling of a Sunyani High Court dated 18th February, 2013.
The issue which the trial judge determined in that ruling is whether or not the plaintiff/respondent(hereinafter called plaintiff) was estopped from mounting this action against the defendant/appellant (hereinafter called the defendant). It was raised as a preliminary legal issue and argued by the parties.
2. The background to the issue and for that matter the claim of the plaintiff is that on 17th July 2008, defendant dismissed the plaintiff as its employee.
The plaintiff petitioned Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice for redress.
The plaintiff discontinued the petition in order to apply for an order of certiorari to quash his dismissal by way of judicial review.
But by then he was out of time to file the application directly.
So plaintiff applied for extension of time within which to file the judicial review application.
3. The High Court presided over by Ato Assan J (since retired)granted the application for extension of time.
Dissatisfied with the grant of the extension of time to file an application for judicial review to quash the dismissal of the plaintiff, the defendant appealed to the Court of Appeal against the grant.
On 30/03/12, the Court of Appeal upheld the appeal and set aside the order extending time for the plaintiff to file an application for judicial review.
4. While in the employment of the defendant, the plaintiff was allocated H/No. P70 Tansuom Estate, Sunyani as his duty post bungalow.
The plaintiff continued to occupy the bungalow even after his dismissal despite the defendant’s request to him to vacate it.
So on 20/04/11 and before the Court of Appeal could determine the defendant’s appeal against the grant of extension of time to the plaintiff, the defendant issued a writ in Suit No. C1/127/2011 against the plaintiff and claimed amongst others declaration of title to the bungalow and an order of immediate ejectment against the plaintiff and perpetually restraining him and his privies from ever possessing or interfering with the house in anyway.
5. The suit was heard by Beresford Acquah J. After a full trial, he granted all the reliefs the defendant sought against the plaintiff in that suit in his judgment on 12th November, 2012.
But before Beresford Acquah J gave the judgment, the plaintiff herein launched Suit No. C12/32/2012 on 26/04/12 against the defendant.
The reliefs the plaintiff cla