Wereko Brobby's Suit Against VRA, November 26

Dr. Charles Wereko-Brobby ia a former VRA Boss and Current CEO Ghana @50 Secretariat


By William Yaw Owusu

Friday, 09 November 2007
AN Accra Fast Track High Court yesterday adjourned to November 26, the case in which Dr. Charles Wereko-Brobby, former Chief Executive, Volta River Authority (VRA), is demanding payment of ¢2.2 billion, being his entitlements from the Authority where he was once the Chief Executive.

The court, presided over by Justice Kobena K. Acquaye, however, awarded ¢1 million cost against Dr Brobby for failing to appear before the court.

His counsel, Mr Akoto Ampaw, was also not in court.

When the case was called Mr Francis Kwame Yeboah, counsel for the VRA, said: "this suit has been pending for a long time and it appears the plaintiff is not interested in the matter."

"We also have a counter-claim and in the circumstances we are praying the court to strike out the plaintiff’s case and award us our counter claims," he added.

The court did not grant the counsel’s request but instead asked the VRA to take steps to serve Dr Wereko-Brobby with hearing notice for him to appear before the court.

Apart from the ¢2.2 billion being sought for, Dr Wereko-Brobby is asking for interest on the amount from April 2004, and also order the VRA to transfer to him the ownership of a Volvo saloon car, GW 2505 T, which was officially assigned to him when he was appointed Chief Executive of the Authority.

In his statement of claim, Dr Wereko-Brobby said he got separated from the VRA on September 17, 2003, but it took the Authority a considerable time amid demands from him before they eventually wrote to him on April, 2004 to formerly notify him of his entitlements.

He said in that letter, a cash equivalent of 43 days earned leave up to the time of his resignation, totalling ¢61 million, six months salary in the sum of ¢187 million, gratuity of five years salary of ¢1.8 billion, the cedi equivalent of fuel allocation from March 31, 2004, and transfer of ownership of the saloon car which is in his possession were discussed.

The VRA, he further argued, in their letter of April 1, 2004, agreed to pay 70 per cent of the entitlements by mid April, 2004 and the rest when he vacated its premises on or before the end of May, the same year.

He contended that because the Authority could not pay the entitlements as agreed on he could also not vacate the premises on the agreed date.

Dr Wereko-Brobby also argued that the delay in the payment persisted into 2005, when he decided to vacate the premises but the Authority had not honoured its obligation and unless compelled by the court, it will not pay him his entitlements.

In their counter claim, the VRA want the court to order Dr Brobby to return the furniture he removed from his official residence.

They also want the court to order the former Chief Executive to return the saloon car that he took away because they claimed he was not entitled to it.