Supreme Court Rules: Leave Must Be Sought Before Filing Appeal Against National Labour Commission Decision
By DL News
Published
Updated
2 min read
In the judgment, Justice Darko Asare JSC affirmed that “decisions from the NLC fell clearly within that category of causes or matters envisaged” by the constitution and the Courts Act, both of which establish the necessity for leave prior t...
The Supreme Court of Ghana has determined that individuals seeking to appeal decisions of the National Labour Commission (NLC) must obtain leave from the Court of Appeal, or alternatively, special leave from the Supreme Court. This decision, handed down on March 20, 2024, in the case of Manford Gyansa-Lutterodt vs. Afam Concept [2024] DLSC17471, has clarified an area of appellate procedure that had previously been the subject of conflicting interpretations.
The Supreme Court, presided over by Owusu (Ms.) JSC along with Justices Amadu JSC, Koomson JSC, Kwofie JSC, and Darko Asare JSC, re-emphasized that appeals against the NLC fall under the category of cases governed by Article 131(2) of the 1992 Constitution and Section 4(2) of the Courts Act 1993. As such, the law mandates that appellants must seek leave from the Court of Appeal first. Should the leave request be refused, an appellant may apply directly to the Supreme Court for special leave as outlined in Rule 7(2) of C.I. 16 or alternatively, seek special leave directly from the Supreme Court under Rule 7(4) of C.I. 16.
In the judgment, Justice Darko Asare JSC affirmed that “decisions from the NLC fell clearly within that category of causes or matters envisaged” by the constitution and the Courts Act, both of which establish the necessity for leave prior to filing an appeal.
This Supreme Court decision effectively invalidates a previous ruling by the Court of Appeal in UNICOF vs. Harlequin International Limited, in which the Court of Appeal had held that appellants did not require leave to appeal decisions of the NLC. Delivered by Justices Cecilia Hanzy Sowah J.A., Gifty Addo J.A., and Dr. Ernest Owusu-Dapaah J.A., the Court of Appeal decision had, until now, reversed an earlier position that required leave.
The recent Supreme Court ruling relies on the precedent set in James David Brown vs. The National Labour Commission & Ahantaman Rural Bank Limited [2019] DLSC6496. This is a case that the Court of Appeal in the UNICOF case held that the Supreme Court never imposed leave requirement in filing an appeal.
By upholding this interpretation, the Supreme Court has effectively restored the Court of Appeal’s Dr. Albert Walter Q. Barnor vs. National Trust Holding Company Limited* [2023] DLCA15133, which dismissed an appeal from the NLC which was filed without the Leave of the Court.
Importantly, the Supreme Court did not directly address or review the decision of the Court of Appeal in UNICOF vs. Harlequin International Limited. However, by implication, the Court of Appeal ruling now holds no legal effect, as the higher court’s determination reinforces the necessity for appellants to secure leave before proceeding with an appeal against the NLC.
This decision introduces a renewed level of procedural rigor for appellants and reflects the Supreme Court’s commitment to consistent interpretation of the requirements for labor dispute appeals. This decision will have broad implications for labor rights advocacy and procedural compliance within Ghana’s labor legal framework.
Click to read full case: https://dennislawgh.com/case-preview?dl_citation_no=[2024]DLSC17471&srb=
