Klu Vrs Youth Employment Agency [2023] GHASC 78 (5 July 2023)

Klu Vrs Youth Employment Agency [2023] GHASC 78 (5 July 2023)

The appellant was a temporary worker whose contract expired in 2013 and who failed to meet the requirements for migration to permanent status. There was no evidence of continued employment or entitlement to salary arrears after contract expiration. The findings of the lower courts were supported by the evidence and no miscarriage of justice occurred.

Citation
[2023] GHASC 78
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/appellant: Alphonse Klu; Defendant/respondent/respondent: Youth Employment Agency
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
5 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Employment Status, Salary Arrears, Public Service Migration, Appellate Procedure
Source Language
English

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alphonse Klu

Plaintiff/appellant/appellant

Youth Employment Agency

Defendant/respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was entitled to salary arrears from January 2013 to date
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was entitled to be migrated onto the service payroll as a permanent employee
  3. 3 Whether the lower courts erred in their findings of fact and law

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant was a temporary worker whose contract expired in 2013 and who failed to meet the requirements for migration to permanent status. There was no evidence of continued employment or entitlement to salary arrears after contract expiration. The findings of the lower courts were supported by the evidence and no miscarriage of justice occurred.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judgments of the High Court and Court of Appeal affirmed
  • No relief granted to the appellant