— Omari -Sasu, J.A. [Presiding] · Anim, J.A. · Kusi -Appouh, (Mrs.) J. · OMARI -
SASU, J.A. · review ruling given by our brethren Brobbey. JSC; Twumasi and Akoto - Bamfo, JJ.A have a mply discussed · ANIM J.A [12/3/2004] H3/123/2004. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL ACCRA -GHANA, A.D. 2004 H3/123/2004 GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK PENSIONERS — PLAINTIFFS -RESPONDENTS ASSOCIATION : RESPONDENTS -APPLICANTS. -VERSUS -GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK — DEFENDANTS -APPELLANTS -RESPONDET REASONS FOR R ULING On February 27, 2004 the a pplication by the Plaintiffs -Respondents -Respon -dents -Applicants for an order to strike out and dismiss the notice of Appeal filed by the Defendants -Appellants -Appellants -Respondents on December 17th 2003 was unanimously gr a nted as prayed but the reasons for the ruling were deferred till today, They are now given hereunder. The said Notice of Appeal of the Respondents Bank was filed pursuant to a Ruling on review by this court dated November 27, 2003 Two grounds of appeal we re filed by the Respondents. These are: — (3A)" The Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred when they held that the " first time "internal mechanism " was raised. " Was in ground (b) of the grounds of appeal filed on behalf of the bank on 29th " Decem ber, 2000, against the decision of the High Court, Accra dated 20th " December, 2000 in the face of documentary evidence to the contrary in the appeal record" Our comment on this ground is that a through search through all the processes filed by the litiga nts herein does not support the contention of the Respondents Bank. The Applicants filed a supplementary a ffidavit on January 19, 2004 in which they exhibited the statement of claim, statement of Defence and summons for Directions filed in the court below and no where in the Defence of the Respondents Bank did they plead that the Bank had any "Internal mechanisms" which regulated conditions governing the retirement of their employees. ORDER 19 RULE 4 OF THE HIGH COURT [CIVIL PROCEDURE] THURES 1954 [LN.140A] provides [inter a lia] "Every pleading shall contain, and contain only a statement in a summary form of the "maternal facts (emphasis is ours) on which the party pleading relies for his claim or " defence as the case me be ... " An examination of the statem ent of Defence of the Respondents Bank (as exhibited) shows that no where in their pleadings did they plead the "internal mechanism" of the Bank as a lleged. The Respondents Bank submitted to judgment in respect of the Applicants Relief 1 on February 27, 199 9 before the High Court and the said judgment was a ctually entered by the Court of Appeal on June, 24, 2002. It is our considered view therefore that in -as much -as the Respondent -Bank failed to plead the said "internal mechanism" in their pleadings, they d id not only breach Order 19 Rule 4
