|
Constitutional law
–
Judges - Retirement benefits–
Retirement benefits of Supreme
Court judge
–
Constitution 1969, Pensions
Ordinance 1950 (Cap 30),
Pensions (Amendment) Ordinance
1954, Judiciary (Retiring Ages)
Law 1986 (PNDCL 161), Pensions
(Amendment) Law 1986 (PNDCL 162)
The plaintiff, a retired Supreme
Court judge, brought an action
for a declaration that his
retirement benefits included his
official residence and car, or
an allowance in lieu thereof. He
also claimed interest on the
arrears of gratuity due him.
Held,
the plaintiff was entitled to
gratuity calculated on his basic
or consolidated salary at the
date of his retirement, and an
annual non-taxable pension
equivalent to the gross annual
salary of a serving judge of the
Supreme Court. However he was
not entitled to the perquisites
of office of a serving judge,
such as free residential
accommodation or the free use of
a State-owned motor vehicle. He
was also not entitled to
interest on the arrears of
gratuity owed him.
ACTION for a declaration of the
plaintiff’s retirement benefits
as a retired judge of the
Supreme Court.
Plaintiff in person.
Martin Amidu,
Deputy Attorney-General (with
him Mrs Adusa-Amankwah
and Gyesi Afrifa) for the
defendants.
AMUA-SEKYI JSC.
As far as the law goes, the
position of the plaintiff,
Osei-Hwere is precisely the same
as that of the plaintiff Wuaku,
in the case in [1994-95] GBR
363. He was appointed a district
magistrate in 1962. He was
promoted to the rank of circuit
court judge in 1966, and
appointed a High Court judge in
1971. In 1983, he was promoted
to the Court of Appeal, and was
elevated to the Supreme Court in
1989. On attaining the
compulsory retiring age of 65
years on 19 October 1990, the
government of the Provisional
National Defence Council, acting
under powers conferred on it by
section 9(2) of the Judiciary
(Retiring Ages) Law 1986 (PNDCL
161), extended his term of
office by one year. At the end
of that period, he was granted a
further extension of one year.
This expired on 19 October 1992.
Even though he claims to have
continued to exercise the
functions of a judge after that
date, this could not, in the
absence of a further extension
of his term of office by the
appointing authority, have the
effect of extending his period
of service which to all intents
and purposes ended on 19 October
1992.
Under the Pensions Ordinance
1950 (Cap 30), the Constitution
1969 and Pensions (Amendment)
Law 1986 (PNDCL 162), the
plaintiff was entitled to
receive a gratuity calculated on
the basis of his basic or
consolidated salary as at the
date of his retirement, and an
annual pension amounting to his
gross annual salary. He was also
entitled to a corresponding
increase in his pension whenever
the salary payable to judges of
the Supreme Court was raised. As
the committees appointed under
the 1969 and 1979 constitutions
did not make any recommendations
to that effect, nor have any
such recommendations been
approved by the President, he
was not entitled to the
perquisites of office for a
serving judge. In particular, he
was not entitled to retain the
use of his official residence,
or the motor vehicle given him
for his use as a judge, or be
paid an allowance is lieu
thereof.
In the light of the above, the
following declaration and orders
are made:
“The plaintiff, Osei-Hwere,
retired from office as a judge
of the Supreme Court on 19
October, 1992. The terms of his
retirement are governed by the
Constitution 1969, the Pension
Ordinance 1950, the Pensions
(Amendment) Ordinance 1954, the
Judiciary (Retiring Ages) Law
1986 (PNDCL 161) and the
Pensions (Amendment) Law 1986 (PNDCL
162). He is entitled to have his
gratuity calculated on his basic
or ‘consolidated’ salary at the
date of his retirement, while
his annual pension amounts to
the gross annual salary of a
serving judge of the Supreme
Court and is not subject to tax.
He is not, additionally,
entitled to the perquisites of
office of a serving judge. His
retiring awards do not include
free residential accommodation
or the free use of a State-owned
motor vehicle and accordingly,
he is to surrender these
forthwith. His claim to be paid
interest on the arrears of
gratuity owed him is refused.”
(sgd) ABBAN JSC
(sgd) AIKINS JSC
(sgd) HAYFRON-BENJAMIN JSC
(sgd) AMPIAH JSC
Declaration granted in part.
Michael Jojo Acquah, Legal
Practitioner
|
