Degbor Vrs Atlantic Port Services [2019] GHASC 44 (12 June 2019)

Degbor Vrs Atlantic Port Services [2019] GHASC 44 (12 June 2019)

The plaintiff was lawfully reinstated, voluntarily retired, and was entitled to arrears and retirement benefits as claimed. The defendant failed to challenge the evidence and calculations, and the Managing Director's actions were within statutory authority. The appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.

Citation
[2019] GHASC 44
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/respondent: Kenneth Degbor; Defendant/respondent/appellant: Atlantic Port Services
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
12 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Wrongful Interdiction, Reinstatement, Retirement Benefits, Board Authority, Conditions of Service
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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenneth Degbor

Plaintiff/appellant/respondent

Atlantic Port Services

Defendant/respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff was reinstated with full benefits after interdiction
  2. 2 Whether the reinstatement was lawful
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff voluntarily retired from the defendant's employment

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff was lawfully reinstated, voluntarily retired, and was entitled to arrears and retirement benefits as claimed. The defendant failed to challenge the evidence and calculations, and the Managing Director's actions were within statutory authority. The appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Plaintiff awarded GHc327,486.47 as arrears of salary and retirement benefits
  • Interest on the amount to be calculated from 24th December 2012 to date of payment in accordance with the Court's (Award of Interest and Post Judgment Interest) Rules, 2005 [C. I. 52]