JUDICIAL OPINIONS !
TRIAL QUESTION !
!
!
!
Article 24 of the Constitution of the Ghana Private Road Transport Union (GPRTU) provides as
follows:
(i) A dispute in the Union shall in the first instance, be settled at local or branch level. If the
aggrieved party is not satisfied, he can appeal to the Regional Secretariat with a
copy of the appeal to the branch.
!
(ii) If the party is still not satisfied with the ruling of the Regional Secretariat, he can appeal
to the National Secretariat, and after that, the National Executive Council, before he appeals
to the Executive Board of the Trades Union Congress and follow it up as laid down in the
Industrial Relations Act, 1965. (Act 299)
!
(iii) With the exception of disputes or grievances which are referred to the National
Executive Council or the Executive Board of the Trades Union Congress, all disputes or
grievances should be settled within a month or the aggrieved party can appeal to the next
higher stage for redress.
!
(iv) Under no circumstances shall a case within the Union be sent to any external body for
investigation or settlement without the prior approval of the National Executive Council. In
all such situations, only cases that have exhausted the grievance procedure under this article
may be considered.”
!
The plaintiff, Elias Kofi Manso is a member of the Ayigya Branch while the defendant, Kwabena
Ogyam is the Ashanti Regional Chairman of the GPRTU. The plaintiff is claiming that the
defendant has breached certain provisions of the GRPTU Constitution with the connivance of other
regional executives of the Union. He has therefore brought an action before the High Court, Kumasi
for an injunction to restrain Mr Ogyam from exercising his functions as Regional Chairman.
!
The defendant entered conditional appearance and applied to set the writ aside on the grounds that
since the plaintiff is alleging violations of the Constitution of the GPRTU and yet has not resorted to
the internal grievance procedures specified in article 24 of the GPRTU Constitution, the action is
premature and should be struck out.
!
The plaintiff is opposing the application on the grounds that: (i) the GRPTU’s domestic grievance
procedure does not oust the jurisdiction of the court; and (ii) that the defendant and his cohort are
the very people in charge of those channels of redress.
!
Assuming that you are the learned Justice of the High Court presiding over the case, write your
opinion on the application.